The Syndicate

But it was true, you know. It really was.

I guess I mean it to say i took it as a personal attack on my character. In retrospect, it was not, but that was how i took it. And i am a woman, i romanticize children. And i wondered why DH did not get pigged, lol.

I have to agree with Bea, my reaction to the initial suspicion would have been the same. I was genuinely upset and offended that anyone would have felt I would use an 8 year old for cred. Had it gotten to that point, I would have had a very hard time NKing him, and we might have a had a problem in my team.

You were right about my lack of suspicions, but up to that point, I acted exactly as I would if i were a civ. I reacted defensively because I tend to be a defensive person, bad or good. Several people have actually used that as a baddie tactic, tried to upset me in order to lynch me as defensive, ha ha. Bad times

You don't have to repost what you said, just because TH was a civvie does not mean he (or you) is the oracle of wisdom and truth.

insertnamehere wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Why are you all lynching Kate? I doubt she is bad.

Good defense.

I apparently don't need one today, lol.

I expected to come in here after work, and find myself 90% dead, and then this inexplicable turn of events happens.

I said previously that i suspent INH, and this kinda just reinforces it for me. No one has been talking about anything but me FOR DAYS, and now INH leads us to lynch...someone else? the only reason i can see for that is to keep the distraction around.

FZ. wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Why are you all lynching Kate? I doubt she is bad.

Is there anyone you would like to lynch? Because up until now, I don't think there is one person you mentioned for a lynch

Yes i did, I said i thought INH was suspicious like days ago, before he joined Llama & THs erroneous crusade on me. The whole Kate is bad case is mainly based on association with me, so why are people lynching her before me? They want to keep the distraction around, if i am the only topic of discussion, they can skate.

So that where my vote is going, since for once i have the luxury of not having to save myself. I am voting for INH

Why are you all lynching Kate? I doubt she is bad.

He should be able to vote as far as I can tell

Also, I would have to be a moron to kill Turnip head, and the blocker must have blocked me both nights, and people were still pigged & killed.

And when you are spending all of your time fending off ludicrous accusations of having flopped etc. everyone looks bad, and thats a fact.

I said this days ago, and will say it again. What i did on Day One, i would have done bad or good. The poll said to pay tribute to someone, i did, i said he was smart. I also thought it likely he was a civ. And I like him and wanted him to have a prize. I find it cynical in the extreme (and kind of insulting) that anyone thinks i would use him for cred, even if he is mature enough (which i think he is, he hosted before he played and had now hosted twice) to play. It is not in my personality.

You should be able to, I checked last night, and again just now.

FZ. wrote:why did people have to go and vote for llama? Now there's no one here to talk to

All he would have talked about is how bad I am anyhow

FZ. wrote:Wow, I'm really sorry llama. I feel even worse for missing the vote
This sucks.
SVS, you just said you thought you knew what TH was, not llama, if I'm not mistaken, and you said that out of the two you trusted TH more. So why are you suddenly saying that's what you thought?


But what happened. SVS got three votes before llama did. Why would she survive and not him?

I need to go to sleep

The way they came out of the gate, in tandem, I thought it was a strong possibility that they had BTS. but becasue I just played against them in Harry Potter, and you would never have guessed that they were teammates, it looked more like civ BTS to me than bad BTS. BUT, I was guessing, I did not know it for a fact, so since I was forced to choose one of them to save myself, Llama felt a bit "sinister" to me. TBH, he always feels sinister, and TH almost never does, but MM, I believe it was voted to tie the two of them so close to the end of the lynch, I had to make a fast decision. Before that, TH had more votes, and I was ready to vote for him, too.

I had to vote for one of them, or be assured of death. So I felt llama was more likely of the two to be bad, if either of them were, which i doubted. But like i said, i had to make a choice. If it were simple baddie self preservation, I would have voted TH, his arguments are more organized and less intuitive in nature. He is harder to argue against. He is a more formidable enemy, at least for me, but I also felt that, if i were wrong about who they were, TH was more likely to be civ. The more hyperbolic his language, in my experience, the more likely he is to be civ, and he kept saying stuff like "Young Andrew", and how I needed a "sap". He has a self righteous tone when hes a civ, he just sounds earnest when hes bad, IMO.

But again, i would have voted for him too, if i had had to.

I am also gonna go with DH, since I don't want to give someone who wants to kill me another prize, and DH seems to be his most serious rival, and i have to go to work.

Sorry, did not notice that

Will be more careful in the future

Linki~ why? You would not vote whomever to save yourself? This is the norm, everyone does it.

Yeah, that was what I thought

Sorry Llama, but I had to self preserve.

thellama73 wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote: Why are you afraid that you will be the target?

S~V~S wrote: OK, of the two of you, I will vote llama, .

That's why.

What? I would vote for Mother theresa to save myself, but between you & TH, I feel better about him.

Are you saying it's personal? Welcome to my world, that is how I have felt the entire game.

thellama73 wrote:

FZ. wrote: Linki@ llama and TH, you are confusing me, lol. How sure are you that she's a baddie. I can't pretend to know how she plays as good as you do. I'm just not getting enough baddie vibe. But maybe I'm being blind

Vote your conscience, but I am pretty sure I can read her at this point.

No you can't. At all, lol.

OK, of the two of you, I will vote llama, becasue tbh, I feel better about TH than about you. Although his arguments against me are better organized, and he is more dangerous to me, i think.

We'll see what happens next.

Also Linki @TH~ no, not becasue you are talking, becasue you are manufacturing a case to fit your belief. Like i said, i have a role in mind for you, but will vote you to save myself.

Turnip Head wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Out of the ones pushing the SVS agenda TH sticks out most to me.

I'm not pushing any agenda. I'm suspicious of SVS, I've been suspicious of her all game, and I've done the best I can to talk through that suspicion with her. I haven't tried to influence anyone else's opinion. It is not my fault that no one else brought up any of their own suspects today.

I'm not seeing SVS's civvie game. She would be accusing me more, i think, if she were a civvie, or she would at least try to get me to stop derailing the thread with suspicion against her if she was a civvie, because she would want to put the focus on players she thinks are baddies. But I think she knows I'm a civ.

I think she's a baddie, so I hope she gets lynched.

Are you suspicious of me because I'm suspicious of SVS? Do you think my suspicion of her is disingenuous?

Why would I be accusing you more? The way you are, i have a role in mind for you, and I don't think Llama is bad based on his full frontal thread association with you, I don't think he would do that if bad, although i have seen him do it with a civ in another game, but then so did you, and i don't think you would fall for it if he was bad.

Are you getting my drift here? That is why I am being "gentle" with you, as I believe FZ said.

Linki @ Llama~ In Grimm, where we were teammates, you threw our teammate under the bus "just in case" since he was low posting. That is what I was thinking of, although I really did not understand why you kept suspecting your CIV recruit in AG, tbh.

FZ. wrote:I'd be happy if someone answered me. Do people here tend to throw their scum buddies under the bus or do they tend to save them even when when it puts them at risk?

A little of both, it depends on the person. llama, for instance, or MP, distances HARD, throws them under the bus sometimes before the bus is even in the terminal, lol. Some others have problems doing that to teammates until it is down to the wire.

I just got home, gotta catch up.

Linki @ Llama~ there was no save, except from people who think I might not be bad for the ridiculous reason you have outlined.

Linki @MM~ I am not so sure Llama or TH are bad, but I will vote for them if i have to save again.

Turnip Head wrote:

You are looking at me becasue you think i am bad for undefined reasons, not becasue i voted for Dom. I had the best reason for voting for Dom, self preservation.

Yes, my suspicion of you is hard to define, but not undefinable altogether. I never said I was looking at you because of your Dom vote. I know that that vote is easily justifiable. I think you want to be able to justify everything you do this game; I think you are playing very carefully.

insertnamehere wrote:I'm on a vacation and have limited internet access. I'm around at night and in the morning. I have to vote early. I may not be on the top of my game. I randomized because it was early in Day 1, and I didn't have any other leads. I'm not sure what part of that you aren't in love with. Apparently, you need some poor sap to shift blame onto, and you think that because I'm on vacation, I'm an easy target.

Indeed, INH set up that he was likely going to have to vote early and randomly in this post, and then he voted early as promised, well before the majority of the Day 1 discussion happened. I don't think you can fault INH too much for that vote. I find it odd that you think it is suspicious. I am interested to see which quotes you planned on pulling from INH, and what you might have to say about them.

DharmaHelper wrote:I'm enjoying not being the one engaged in battle with either Llama or SVS for once.

I hope you're at least taking notes from the sidelines. :P

Once again you are misconstruing and misinterpreting. I said NOTHING about his random vote, I read his post. That is why I was just confused. I said in light of his DAY ZERO vote for Andrew, nothing about him randomizing. Which is why I was just confused about him saying he was on vaca and going random, I was like *?*, I never mentioned his random vote? I was saying he seemed to shift his focus, I was surprised to see that he had voted for Andrew on Day Zero in light of some things he has said since then.

And using inflammatory language, like saying I needed a sap makes you look worse than me, tbh.

You ask me to produce detailed suspicions on Day Two about day one, which is pretty much impossible unless you overinflate small issues into large ones, then mock me for them, lol.

insertnamehere wrote:

S~V~S wrote:You are looking at me becasue you think i am bad for undefined reasons, not becasue i voted for Dom. I had the best reason for voting for Dom, self preservation.

I am not in love with INHs vote for Sorsha. INHs whole schtick has been off IMO; some of the things he has said, in light of his Day Zero vote for Andrew seem off to me. I thought both bea & MMs self votes unneccessary as they both were participatory before the lynch, especially MM, so I am not sure what the point was of either vote. MM has said things I feel pretty Ok about otherwise, but I don't love the self vote.

Of the Dom voters, I thought Elo made some good points for Day One, and some of the votes seemed more in the "I trust SVS" mode when they voted for him, and I cannot fault them on that~ sorry, but I can't Of them i was the most opportunistic, becasue I wanted to live. So i plowed a vote onto someone whose posts I had not even read solely to save myself. It was Day one, lots of people vote for lame reasons on Day one, and most of them are NOT baddies. I can think of two people that probably are not baddies that voted for lame reasons

Had i been caught up, and not felt a need to give myself an insurance vote (it was 3-2 when i voted, on the phone at my folks house), I would have voted for INH.

I still might today. I will see what he has to say about this before i pull quotes.

I'm on a vacation and have limited internet access. I'm around at night and in the morning. I have to vote early. I may not be on the top of my game. I randomized because it was early in Day 1, and I didn't have any other leads. I'm not sure what part of that you aren't in love with. Apparently, you need some poor sap to shift blame onto, and you think that because I'm on vacation, I'm an easy target.

No, sorry about the vaca thing, but I was talking about the threatening thing with Kate actually. That was a weird thing to say, and i am not sure of your meaning in saying it.

And re the editing Which has come up again, i see), I edited out a word, and the Host said it was OK, and i replaced it with a euphemism for that word. I said it, and so long as no one cusses and the host does not catch it first, I don't know how this makes me bad either.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I also think the baddie save possibility is a bit far-fetched and unfounded. Dom expressed some suspicion of SVS, but just because he's good doesn't make SVS bad. I think the suspicion of dom was more justifiable, even if he did flip good.

To be fair, Dom often says stuff off the top of his head, :whistle: , kinda stream of consciousness, that does not always sound as he means it i think. I doubt i would have voted for him on Day One if i did not feel i had to.

You are looking at me becasue you think i am bad for undefined reasons, not becasue i voted for Dom. I had the best reason for voting for Dom, self preservation.

I am not in love with INHs vote for Sorsha. INHs whole schtick has been off IMO; some of the things he has said, in light of his Day Zero vote for Andrew seem off to me. I thought both bea & MMs self votes unneccessary as they both were participatory before the lynch, especially MM, so I am not sure what the point was of either vote. MM has said things I feel pretty Ok about otherwise, but I don't love the self vote.

Of the Dom voters, I thought Elo made some good points for Day One, and some of the votes seemed more in the "I trust SVS" mode when they voted for him, and I cannot fault them on that~ sorry, but I can't Of them i was the most opportunistic, becasue I wanted to live. So i plowed a vote onto someone whose posts I had not even read solely to save myself. It was Day one, lots of people vote for lame reasons on Day one, and most of them are NOT baddies. I can think of two people that probably are not baddies that voted for lame reasons

Had i been caught up, and not felt a need to give myself an insurance vote (it was 3-2 when i voted, on the phone at my folks house), I would have voted for INH.

I still might today. I will see what he has to say about this before i pull quotes.

Yeah, Andrew is smart. What does that have to do with me being bad? What does that even contradict?

Like I said, I think you and TH are trying to fit the facts to your theory. And I know I often have more than one motivation. I prefer to eat fresh, local food. Fresh food is healthier; it's local so it supports the local economy, does NOT support factory farms, and the place where I buy it does not use pesticides or inorganic fertilizer. Plus it's tasty.

Lots of motivations.

What was the third?

Like i said, they are all the same thing. I wanted the kid to win a prize, i also thought it likely he was a civvie. What else was there.

And do you do things with only one motivation?

Your case smacks of someone who is looking for reasons to bolster a hypothesis rather than someone who has evidence to build a hypothesis from. Like TH yesterday misconstruing what i said becasue it fit his ideas about me.

I never contradicted myself.

When did that happen? I did not know about the "randomized only" thing becasue it was not in this thread. I was pretty much under attack from the second i said i thought Andrew was probably a civ. I don't recall saying anything contradictory; i had at that time, and still do have, no reason whatsoever to lie about my motivations yesterday. I wanted Andrew to win a prize cause its fun to win prizes, but also I believed (for reason now shown to have been wrong) that he was very likely to have been a civ.

No contradiction because there was no lying becasue there was no reason to lie.

Like I said, the thing you are crucifying me for is a thing i would have done bad or civ. And thats the fact.

thellama73 wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Shame about BwT

Ditto. :/

Yeah, but no night kill is good news indeed. Don't worry BWT, my friend, we will avenge you!

The baddies kill on Even nights, so that is expected news, actually.

More people than there are baddies (including me~ had to save myself, i had no opinion on him) piled onto Dom.

And other than disagreeing with you philosophically, which is what all of your arguments come down to, why exactly do you urge everyone to vote for me?

Sorry Dom, I had no notion as to your affiliation, I had to vote self preservation.

I will catch back up tonight and in the AM.

Voting Kate.

I have not really had time to read back, still at the parents, but don't want to miss the vote. Voting self preservation, sorry Dom.

I honestly have to say that your post up there is the most cynical thing i have eber seen in mafia, it actually makes me want to go on hiatus or stop playing. I am not even sure if I should be putting this in green.

I honestly only wanted a kid to win a prize. I think you are not bad, and believe what you are saying. But tbh, i also think you were just looking for any old thing to suspect me, and grabbed at that. You must think I am a bad person to use an 8 year old for cred. I would have done what I did if i were bad or good, for the exact reasons i stated.

Turnip Head wrote:I don't want you to be bad, I hope you're not bad SVS. I like your participation when you're a civvie, and do not enjoy when we are on opposing teams. :P

Are you suspicious of anyone yet? There was a lot of discussion for a Day 0 (that opening poll was an excellent way to get discussion rolling in a game, I might add), but I can't say that anything I read the first time through pinged me outright.

I have spent most of this game defending wanting to give a little kid i know IRL a prize. As you can see from Llamas vote, it is being turned into something sinister when really I only wanted Andrew to have fun and getting prizes is fun. Oh, and I did not read something posted in the sign up thread. And it appears that that is where this thread is going to head. Several people have seemed to be honing in on this. It was not "trying for cred", and I know I can be cynical, as can we all, but not when it comes to kids.

So at this point, I am not sure. I don't want to do the No U, but I am not sure why someone would want to blow this out of proportion, but it seems to be the trend. I think I may have to hold my vote, and being as I am going out today to a family party, I won;t be around much either.

That happens to me a lot, people want me to be bad, so they misread me

See what I did there?

Turnip Head wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Well, that was a weird result.

And I thought (assumed) DH voted Andrew for voting him? If I recall correctly, Andrew got along pretty well with DH in Thomas. But i have no idea if that was actually the case, it was just an assumption on my part.

Why are you explaining young Andrew's motivations?

I was not, I was responding to this remark that FZ made:

FZ. wrote:

thellama73 wrote:FZ, why did you vote to lynch Kate without saying anything?

I did? I didn't even notice that. I have no idea how that vote came to be. I refreshed the page or something. That's the last thing I remember doing.
I'll change it, but I have no idea who to vote for. I might go for Elo, since I didn't like how she was "trying to get into Epi's head" Or DH, for voting for Andrew for no good reason.

So actually, to be precise, i was explaining what i thought to be DHs motivations. If you read my post, then you read that one, which was the one right before it

Why are you taking remarks out of context?

I expected it to sound more...totally positive, i guess? The "Yay" thing turned into vicious dogs attacking (which was an odd coincidence due to the death dogs in D & D yesterday, but that was not what I meant). The death dogs part was unexpected, I guess.

Well, that was a weird result.

And I thought (assumed) DH voted Andrew for voting him? If I recall correctly, Andrew got along pretty well with DH in Thomas. But i have no idea if that was actually the case, it was just an assumption on my part.

thellama73 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Becasue i know him~ hes a smart kid, and a sophisticated one, but I still think he would have troubles being part of a decision to NK his Mom.

So you believe that if he were randomly assigned the NK role he would prefer to lose the game than NK Kate? I don't think I understand your point.

I think any little kid would be uncomfortable with this decision. And i don't understand why you are making such a huge deal out of this. This is my opinion. i could be wrong.

Linki~ I disagree, tbh. As usual.

Llama, Do you know any 8 year olds?

Linki~ lol

Becasue i know him~ hes a smart kid, and a sophisticated one, but I still think he would have troubles being part of a decision to NK his Mom.

I know what the odds mean, what i am saying is that even if it was random, odds are good he is a civ in any case, so i am OK having voted for him, and trusting that he will do the right thing if he wins.

He said that in the sign up thread? My bad, i did not read the sign up thread, i only read what is in the game thread as being canonical.

Well, the odds are still in Andrews favor. I am OK with my vote.

bea wrote:(I'm guessing it was the naughty word you edited out. )

I edited it out, to be clear. I said i would do so.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:I'm running on the "Lynch George Lucas" platform.

Only if it's because of the prequel trilogy.

I'm not sure how comfortable I feel about all the buddying-up votes for Andrew early on. I agree with S~V~S and would be surprised if he were bad. But I also feel like baddies could use that as an excuse to gain some early cred.

Linki: I shall object until we receive free figgy pudding! FREE PUDDING FOR ALL!!!!

I don't understand the history behind it, but I don't think that assigning roles based on IRL status is something that happens, unless it's a specific game mechanic.

Like i said, i find it unlikely that Epi would put an 8 year old in a position to night kill his Mother, or to discuss killing people with his Mother, i just don't. I could be totally wrong, but that is what i believe. I am not trying to make anyone else believe it.

Just don't say any naughty words

I have multiple bars of mouth washing soap

Just a disclaimer, I will edit naughty words when I sees em~

Again, I doubt that, but I could be wrong, this is my best guess. If you don't want to give the kid a prize, cool. Vote for someone else.

now really, i gotta get out of here

No it makes sense, but lets say I have reason to believe that Rob might have randomed with tweaks in the past

In any case, I still think Andrew is the person most likely to be a civvie, and I am happy with my vote, and have to go do other stuff.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Of course, but that logic, am I correct in assuming that you believe Kate to be a civ too?

Not necessarily, but probably, yes. I find it unlikely that he would put her in that position either. But I find it MORE unlikely that a father of little kids would do that to a little kid. Andrew is more impressionable than Kate, and might have more problems with that. But yeah, I would be more likely to trust her than not.

Linki @ Llama~ BWT likes to see all sides of an issue, not just his, A trait I admire since i don;t have it, lol. It is what i assume he is doing here.

Ebwop, it's day zero. This is all guesswork at this point, IMO.