The Syndicate

Long Con wrote:Shit, sorry SD. That was a misread on my part - sig quoting himself threw me off, and I was reading his response to his post as your response to his post:

Spacedaisy wrote:
sig wrote:
sig wrote:I see three scenarios here.

1. Ika is mafia and killed Silver before she could get a strong read on him.
2. Someone killed Silver to frame Ika, this points to an experienced mafia member.
3. Silver mainly talked about DF, Epi, and LC around the time of her death and EOD. One of them is mafia and killed her.
I'm requoting this, the more I think about the more likely it is to be true, plus I think all three would think that Ika could be framed for Silver's death. I'll do the leg work for it over the phase, I'm just throwing out some thoughts right now.
It's possible, of the three I thinkDF is the least likely to do this and I feel pretty good about Epi. DF could be bad, LC could be bad. I could see LC pulling this.

That said, I'm not convinced it was one of those three either. I'm still partial to my reason. That said, we've had a lot to build on that so far. And the reaction to her death I have liked the least is Lorab. For the moment I am putting my vote there.
I went to smugly fetch this post so I could show you how I wasn't putting words in your mouth at all, when I finally realized what you and sig were telling me. Sorry for the derp on that front. My bad.

LOL, it's ok. I did forget that little blurb back and forth so you were justified in pointing out you had said you suspected me. This response makes me feel better about you, that was making me question you.

Long Con:

I never said they thought ika would be framed. What sig said was that those were the three people Silver was talking about and he was suggesting one of those three killed her because of the fact she was calling them bad. I was giving my opinion on the likelihood of the three people in question doing that. Of those three you are the most likely to do so IMO, but even so I am not convinced that's why she died. So you are the one who is getting defensive. And yes, I will respond when you are putting words in my mouth that I never said. That and twisting my words will always get a response from me, I really don't like it.

And frankly, I had forgotten completely about that exchange which should show you just how not on my radar you are, so I don't understand why you are getting worked up with me. I was discussing how plausible someone else's idea was and as you see by the end of that post I concluded by saying I wasn't convinced that was the reason she was killed anyway. So who is the one getting defensive here LC, really.

Scotty wrote:Grr fixed. Damn phone formatting.
Scotty wrote:
LoRab wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:Now Lorab I am up in the air about. I am a little surprised that when Silver was killed, Lorab immediately went to trying to downplay the idea she is likely civ because of Carson. I get that possibility is out there, but why is it so important to you that Silver is not trusted? She barely made any reads at all? Or were we too close for comfort to a teammate who might be linked to her death?
I wasn't trying to downplay anything, and I never disputed that she was likely civ--I merely pointed out the possibility that it is not 100% confirmed that she's civ. I often point out a possibility, even when small, that no one has considered.
Spacedaisy wrote:Fair enough, I'm moving my vote to Scotty. Just because I can for the moment. I'll try and evaluate tomorrow and see where I want to put my vote. I'm moving it off Lorab because of my god awful gut reads so far.
So LoRab is saying essentially: 'I was just pointing out the possibility that silver is civ' after you said "I get that possibility is out there" and it sways you enough that you take the vote off her, putting it on me just because? ok.

That's basically confirmation bias.

I was way off on my first two suspicions. It is shaking my confidence. I moved my vote quickly because I didn't want to set someone up for a bandwagon when I'm not feeling super certain about.

Long Con wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:
sig wrote:
sig wrote:I see three scenarios here.

1. Ika is mafia and killed Silver before she could get a strong read on him.
2. Someone killed Silver to frame Ika, this points to an experienced mafia member.
3. Silver mainly talked about DF, Epi, and LC around the time of her death and EOD. One of them is mafia and killed her.
I'm requoting this, the more I think about the more likely it is to be true, plus I think all three would think that Ika could be framed for Silver's death. I'll do the leg work for it over the phase, I'm just throwing out some thoughts right now.
It's possible, of the three I thinkDF is the least likely to do this and I feel pretty good about Epi. DF could be bad, LC could be bad. I could see LC pulling this.
Is that because I suspect you?

How does killing Silverwolf frame ika? That seems... counter-logical.

I wasn't aware you suspected me, so no it's not because you suspect me.

And I never said the silver kill frames ika. Sig said that.

Fair enough, I'm moving my vote to Scotty. Just because I can for the moment. I'll try and evaluate tomorrow and see where I want to put my vote. I'm moving it off Lorab because of my god awful gut reads so far.

sig wrote:@Daisy what do you think of Llama voting for you?

I don't really care. A little suspicion can keep a civ alive. which I think is what Epi was just saying about me, lol. I mostly think llama is civ, though I have my paranoia.

sig wrote:
sig wrote:I see three scenarios here.

1. Ika is mafia and killed Silver before she could get a strong read on him.
2. Someone killed Silver to frame Ika, this points to an experienced mafia member.
3. Silver mainly talked about DF, Epi, and LC around the time of her death and EOD. One of them is mafia and killed her.
I'm requoting this, the more I think about the more likely it is to be true, plus I think all three would think that Ika could be framed for Silver's death. I'll do the leg work for it over the phase, I'm just throwing out some thoughts right now.

It's possible, of the three I thinkDF is the least likely to do this and I feel pretty good about Epi. DF could be bad, LC could be bad. I could see LC pulling this.

That said, I'm not convinced it was one of those three either. I'm still partial to my reason. That said, we've had a lot to build on that so far. And the reaction to her death I have liked the least is Lorab. For the moment I am putting my vote there.

I've seen his mafia play, and this is nothing like it. I wouldn't say he is totally clear, but he's about as close as it comes to a sure town read for me personally. I hear your logic and it would seem to make sense, but it's his play style that is screaming civ to me. Look at the difference in his playstyle from Turf Wars to this game Sig. I also have felt like Dom was sincere town, even though I have not agreed with his suspicions. Lol, and llama I go back and forth on. I lean more town on him, but I'm not as confident as I am about ika. Now Lorab I am up in the air about. I am a little surprised that when Silver was killed, Lorab immediately went to trying to downplay the idea she is likely civ because of Carson. I get that possibility is out there, but why is it so important to you that Silver is not trusted? She barely made any reads at all? Or were we too close for comfort to a teammate who might be linked to her death?

I still think someone might have killed her because they were afraid of her freaky good instincts. That's my personal opinion.

Ika, I think the reason should be pretty self evident.

MM, I had forgotten about that! LOL

Llama, so I should not point out someone's lack of logic because I told you tosuspect me all you like? Riiiiiight. You just aren't use to such an engaged Daisy. Regardless what you think, I'm civ.

Ika did you say why sorsha?

Oh forget it

Spacedaisy wrote:

:nice nod:

I have very good reason to speculate on it, but I don't have to share all my reasons for everything I ask. Eyeball me all you like Mr. Con, I don't have anything to hide.

No, you spent the game with civs going after civs. It wasn't just one or two. The baddies didn't have to do a thing because the civs were doing their job for them. I was there and watching it all, so I am very aware of how it went down. Llama is suggesting I am bad and sticking my neck out in order to protect someone I know is civ just in order to keep people talking about him. Which would be about the stupidest thing I could do as a baddie in this game. Numbers are not in their favor, they are not going to stick their necks out in such a manner.

No, this is not at all what happened in Turf Wars. What happened there is the baddies sat back and let you go after each other because that's all the civs did for most of the game. Nothing like what llama is suggesting I am doing.

You are suggesting that I as a baddie would draw attention to myself by not only being part of a bandwagon mislynch, but leading two of them, in order to keep another civ alive? In game a where there are only 3 baddies on the team? Llama, you are setting up lynches a day out and your logic is highly questionable.

Llama: What reason would lead a baddie to try and keep the civs from lynching another civ?

So we didn't see any insanification today, which makes me wonder if Silver was the insanifier or if the insanifier was role blocked.

DF, can you tell me your opinion on Illy, ika, Epi and Scotty?

Dom I neglected to address your comments about me assuming Matt asked for a replacement. I actually did not mean that Matt asked for a replacement, my point was Matt was having difficulty keeping up too but he did not ask for a replacement so quickly. My assumption was bubbles had asked for a replacement and Matt had not.

Well, don't be surprised if it gets people suspicious. We believe words matter around here.

Also, I am probably most confident in you as town fwiw. So don't take my questioning as a sign of distrust.

DF, who are you top suspects currently?

Oh you are allowed to have whatever reads you like, but the way you phrased that made it sound as though I was second on your list because of silver's reads you were going to push. You should listen to her read on me, she was right.

Epi didn't ever go after me for my posts that I recall.

Yep I was wrong on my theory regarding bubbles replacement, I sure it won't be the last time I'm wrong I my mafia career. It is what it is.

ika wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Let me run this question by you, ika: Instead of telling Lord Grantham what he should have done, why not tell us who you think murdered Silverwolf? That would be the most helpful use of your time. I find it bizarre that I should even have to raise this question to you.
well im goign to look at her read and lynch the people she was supecting and go from there.

i knwo dfar was one of them so im starting there tommorw

daisy is a close second

ill have to read the rest of he reads

That's interesting since she was town reading me.

thellama73 wrote:Speaking of Daisy, this the second time she has led us away from voting for DFaraday. I'll probably be voting for her tomorrow.

1. You are a big boy, take responsibility for your own vote.

2. Mislynching someone does not make me a baddie, just a mistaken civ.

3. So you want to lynch me because I have supposedly shielded DF, but we don't know know DF's alignment. Makes total sense.

I'll tell you what, lynch DF if you think he's bad, and if he flips bad, then talk about voting for me. But until you know DF is bad, stop trying to paint me as bad for not wanting to vote for him. I am not bad.

Matt wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:Of all the people garnering votes at the moment Matt is the one that seems the most likely to be bad. For the moment my vote is going there, but I'm not certain I'll leave it there yet. Plus, I really don't know that I think DF is bad and I'm historically crap at reading him so I have no desire to mislynches him early yet again.
What? Why am I most likely to be bad? Were you able to determine my alignment based on the few "gotta catch up" posts I had?

Hrm.

Aren't you caught up? I never felt confident in voting you, it was kind of the best of a bunch of bad options and I have since changed my vote to bubbles. I got nothing but love for you!

Matt wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:I should feel bad about bwt getting lynched early yet again, but frankly his vote was hella shady, so I have no regrets about where I out it. I was hoping he might defend and would have considered changing my vote if he could convince me. But he didn't show back up, so I'm cool with my vote. Now to wait for the flip...

Linki: Well not ideal but if we are going to lose a civ, I'd rather it be the vote manipulation role I think so it could be worse IMO.
Linki feels a bit shady. "I'd rather it be the vote manip role...I think..."

Hrm.

Would you prefer I weep and well, rend my clothes and wear sack cloth instead? I'm just owning my vote and I have no regrets over it. If I were bad I could summon some fake regret, but I'm not so I don't feel bad about making an honest mistake.

Polo wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:I'm at work so let me keep my explanation quick. Matt is low engagement right now, but he has not been replaced. I think a person who believes they might not have time is more likely to hang in there longer if they are a civ, because they don't have teammates they know they are letting down. Civs don't know who their teammates are so they are less likely to feel the pressure of helping their team. That was a very fast replacement and she didn't say anything about getting a replacement in her post that I recall. Most civs announce they are going to ask for one.
I agree with this. I think hosts are more likely to replace baddies whose team needs them than a lone civ. Many hosts have disagreed with me on this, but I've seen it happen, man.
Would you two comply to lynching Bea/Bubbles today?

I already voted for bubbles, So yes

I was actually considering my vote to her for a policy lynch alongside Sorsha and when I saw that quick replacement it looked shady to me, so I'm comfortable with this vote, dangerous or not. I also can't tell if you are trying to dispute the idea or agree with it from what you said. Be straightforward Epi, what is your opinion of Bubbles/bea right now.

I'm at work so let me keep my explanation quick. Matt is low engagement right now, but he has not been replaced. I think a person who believes they might not have time is more likely to hang in there longer if they are a civ, because they don't have teammates they know they are letting down. Civs don't know who their teammates are so they are less likely to feel the pressure of helping their team. That was a very fast replacement and she didn't say anything about getting a replacement in her post that I recall. Most civs announce they are going to ask for one.

This replacement actually makes me more inclined to vote Bubbles/bea at this point over Matt.

I wouldn't say I strongly suspect Matt, I didn't like any of the current wagons. But when I looked at the list and tried to decide who I would be more comfortable voting for, there was no one.

I'm not saving DF, I can't read DF for shit and I have contributed to his mislynch a lot in the last year, it's making me gun shy and I don't see the case for him as being all that strong in the first place. Mistrust me all you want Llama, but those are the facts, I don't have any nefarious intentions.

Of all the people garnering votes at the moment Matt is the one that seems the most likely to be bad. For the moment my vote is going there, but I'm not certain I'll leave it there yet. Plus, I really don't know that I think DF is bad and I'm historically crap at reading him so I have no desire to mislynches him early yet again.

I am at a loss to understand what is happening this game. I am not confident in a DF lynch but I am not confident he is civ either. But these "random" votes that he has received both today and yesterday are bizarre. That said, everyone involved in this whole conversation (both sides) are easy early mislynches,i, not sure I would put money on any of them being bad at the moment.

DF, have you said who you suspect at the moment?

Linki @Polo: if someone is insanified it will be absolutely clear they have been, trust me.

Dom wrote:Daisy what do you think of Illy's post?

Dom wrote:Daisy, would you like to answer my question or?

Geez, relax a minute here, lol. I read your question at work and wanted to ISO Illy to see what you were talking about. That is why I didn't answer you sooner. The answer is, what post are you referring to? Most of her posts were fluff. I don't mean that disrespectfully, I've been giving it a pass for now because I assume she is just getting reacclimated to the game. But you clearly have one post in mind so could you clarify your question please?

This is a moo point (like a cow's opinion a la Joey from Friends) since the force vote role is gone.

I suppose it's possible. But for that to happen at such an early stage in the games seems like a reach to me. But stranger things have happened.

Sorsha: As a baddie in Turf Wars he repeatedly said he would be demoralized if she was gone and would probably just not do anything. I highly doubt he would kill her right now if he were bad.

Llama: I don't know what to make of that response. It implies you are not blackmailed, but you never say that so it leads me to believe even more you are and just trying to be careful not to say as much or imply as much. That said, please don't take my posts on the topic as towards you, I don't want a straight answer out of you if you have been blackmailed. I am simply putting it out there as a point to consider and perhaps discuss for other players.

Polo: Then we might consider anyone on either player list a possibility.

Someone who played EST, did she standout as far as her scum hunting skills in that game as well?

Linki @Epi, that was my first thought too, but I wanted to be sure he had actually showed up already. Has he been around the site since the post?

I did not believe ika to be bad because his play is drastically different than in Turf Wars and I don't think he is simply fooling us. I think at least one of the baddies payed Turf Wars and recognized Silverwolf as a legitimate threat because of her instincts in that game. I need to check out the player list to get an idea of who that might narrow it down to for me.

Also, I am wondering if llama has been blackmailed.

Has ika been in here yet?

I should feel bad about bwt getting lynched early yet again, but frankly his vote was hella shady, so I have no regrets about where I out it. I was hoping he might defend and would have considered changing my vote if he could convince me. But he didn't show back up, so I'm cool with my vote. Now to wait for the flip...

Linki: Well not ideal but if we are going to lose a civ, I'd rather it be the vote manipulation role I think so it could be worse IMO.

ika wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I don't quite know what to make of Daisy's soliloquy towards Ika. I don't remember ever seeing her post that much at once. Maybe he's just gotten under her skin, which is understandable, but it seems like atypical behavior from her, and atypical behavior is always worth noticing.

That and the fact my husband has been bugging me to revert back to old Daisy mafia style. I'm trying my hand at it again, but it's been many years since I have been that player, so we'll see if I can keep it up.
Sorry for that, i dont try to get under peopels skin. i try to provoke reaction out of people and sometimes my quesitoning what i say can lead to that.

if i offended you sorry. if you likeyou can pm me psot game about it cus i feel like us going into it might be OTish

You did not offend me ika, if you had I would have taken it up with a mod or privately. We are just playing a game, and I'm enjoying it.

And I understand your baseline, but I still disagree with holding site Mods to a higher standard. But it's neither here nor there.

Epignosis wrote:
ika wrote:
Epignosis wrote:I'm disinterested because I made a mistake in my spreadsheet.
is it that you put yourself as scum?
spacedaisy will understand.

Huh?

Scotty wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I don't quite know what to make of Daisy's soliloquy towards Ika. I don't remember ever seeing her post that much at once. Maybe he's just gotten under her skin, which is understandable, but it seems like atypical behavior from her, and atypical behavior is always worth noticing.

That and the fact my husband has been bugging me to revert back to old Daisy mafia style. I'm trying my hand at it again, but it's been many years since I have been that player, so we'll see if I can keep it up.
What does old Daisy Mafia style entail? Making flower puns?

Back in the LP/TP days I used to post much more heavily, and usually put all my thoughts into the thread as they came to me. Basically more overall engagement.

thellama73 wrote:I don't quite know what to make of Daisy's soliloquy towards Ika. I don't remember ever seeing her post that much at once. Maybe he's just gotten under her skin, which is understandable, but it seems like atypical behavior from her, and atypical behavior is always worth noticing.

That and the fact my husband has been bugging me to revert back to old Daisy mafia style. I'm trying my hand at it again, but it's been many years since I have been that player, so we'll see if I can keep it up.

Silverwolf wrote:@Daisy-Why is your read of me dependent on ika? Do you have any independent thoughts on my alignment outside of what ika says?

He will deny this until the day he dies, but I once fooled him as scum in a game.

Because at this moment I don't have a read on you independent from him, as we proceed I'm sure that may change. As I mentioned already there is the possibility either you could be fooling him or he could be fooling me, which is why neither of you are getting a full on civ pass from me, but as far as day 1, unless either of you do something to change my mind I doubt I will vote either of you today.

No worries ika, I'm off today you can respond whenever. And I'm willing to be open to understanding what you mean.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
DFaraday wrote:I'm not liking so many votes on Dom already. Especially since I don't think he's done anything shady.

As for Ika's comments re: Epi, I don't agree with it. And I think the practice of policy voting people for not playing a distinctly town game, regardless of whether that person is actually bad, is itself not a town strategy.
I agree with this. If Dom is doing something that someone feels is suspicious and pointed it out, then I must have missed it. I'll look back later and see if I can find it though.

Have you not been reading either myself or LC? I find it weird that he is phrasing things in such a way to frame someone as suspicious without saying as much, especially in light of the fact that he was so paranoid about the fact BR using the word "sneaky" because it might be subtly doing just that. If he suspected it as a civ, he would say it outright. Otherwise why say it?

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
DFaraday wrote:I'm not liking so many votes on Dom already. Especially since I don't think he's done anything shady.

As for Ika's comments re: Epi, I don't agree with it. And I think the practice of policy voting people for not playing a distinctly town game, regardless of whether that person is actually bad, is itself not a town strategy.
I agree with this. If Dom is doing something that someone feels is suspicious and pointed it out, then I must have missed it. I'll look back later and see if I can find it though.
Somehow I went to post before I finished my thought. Need more coffee still...

That being said, if Dom is indeed bad, then this looks like someone trying to offer a subtle defense of a teammate without providing any legitimate backing to it.

I think I know where I'm putting a placeholder vote for now.

So what you are saying in the first quote is, I don't see why people are suspecting Dom. Then in the second quote you are saying, well if Dom is bad then DF must be his teammate. And your conclusion is to vote for DF? Based on the hypothetical alignment of someone you don't seemed inclined to think is bad in the first place? I don't trust you birdy.

birdwithteeth

ika wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:
Two things:

1. I did not make no comments, I commented on the one thing I had an opinion worth expressing about. That thing was the forced Ld statements conversation which was one of maybe two major conversations.
I knew about that one but to me i felt like it had little to no real substance

2. I am a slow starter. I engage more/become more talkative the further along I get.
can you show me a town and scum game of yorus then? also if your slow to start when is the normal point you start getting reads

I do have one other thing to comment on, but you probably won't care for it ika. I think your conversation earlier regarding higher standards is highly flawed. In mafia, everyone has a different perspective, different approaches and different ways of thinking. I have often in my mafia career had times when someone seemed so bad to me because I could not see a civilian reason for their behavior. But in the end I found that a lot of it was simply because I looked at things one way and their thought processes led them to look at it in a completely different way. What I am saying is, you are judging everyone according to your standards/expectations, and you are not infallible. Your way is not the only right way. So I would assume you are holding me to a standard because of my role in this site as well and that this plays some part in your feelings about my entrance, but I not only think this is illogical and unfair of you, I also think it will bite you in the ass if you keep up this approach with people.
I am one of the biggest people who says they are not infallible frankly. i may act very aggressive or athortive in my stances, its jsut who i am. but i always know i can be wrong. as for the standards, its more of the baseline i use that has been very successful in my games i have played.

All that said, I think you and SW are likely civilians. You are just incorrect about me.
Why am i a civ?

I don't have a set time when I get reads, they happen when they happen. How quickly I get a read on someone does not have much to do with me and more to do with how well I have learned to read them or what their tells are for me. So there is no hard and fast time. Additionally, what I mean by slow starter is that I post less early in a game and slowly ramp it up over the course of the game as I get my footing more.

The highlighted portion is my exact point against you right now. You have some kind of baseline that you think is what people should measure up against, thereby implying that it is the "right" way to play that you can always measure people against. I recommend that when this game is over you reconsider this, because I know at least in my case it is failing you.

Finally, what you feel doesn't change the truth. I commented on the only thing I felt worth commenting on, I didn't have any other thoughts at that point. Think or feel what you like about it, it doesn't change my alignment.

I think you are civ because you are not behaving the same way as you did in Turf Wars. I feel less strongly about Silverwolf but you seem to think she is civ. lets logic it out shall we?

If you were bad and she was not on your team, you would say you believed she was civ because you know she is.

If you were good and believed she was civ, you would say she is because that is your honest read of her.

If you were good and believed she was bad, you would say that because you take pride in the fact you can read her well and you want to solve the game.

If you were bad and she were bad, you would likely call her civ to protect her.

Based on your actions, I believe you to be civ. You have read her civ at this point, so my conclusion is you honestly believe her to be civ. at the moment I am willing to trust you are correct based on your knowledge of her.

This doesn't mean I give you both a free pass for the remainder of the game, this is just my thinking on the two of you at this point in time. I can also acknowledge that she might be fooling you or you might be fooling me. But it's early and the way I feel about you now is what will affect my vote today. Who knows what might change my mind tomorrow.

P.S. Bravo on evoking this much out of me on Day 1. This is not the norm.

P.P.S. For my best Mafia performance see Death Note. For a civ performance see maybe The Hobbit? I dunno that these will tell you much though. Death Note was not a conventional game and I've never won as civ yet. But mafia tends to win here at TS so that's not all that surprising.

Dom wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Dom wrote:I wouldn't say anyone who's characterized my game is wrong. I just think "sneaky" is a weird word to use to characterize someone you don't suspect.
How can Black Rock suspect you over the span of years? The context was about how you've changed.

In other words, she used a word to describe your overall play as it has evolved, irrespective of you right now.

Black Rock wrote:
Dom wrote:
Illyria wrote:Scotty and Llama, I do not think I know you, but you have been cracking me up during my catch up.
I am an ASL interpreter.

Okay, Dom here is my first question. Has your game play changed significantly do you think?

Also, can someone please remind me how we multi quote here? I will go hunting in just a mo but figured maybe I could get a faster answer in thread.
From the last time you saw it? I wouldn't say significantly.
Since the last time we played together a lot? I'd say so. But feel free to ask other people from LP/TP too!
I can help with my opinion. For the most part yes. He's much more sneakier. Sometimes I think he falls back into habits but no one believes me when he does.
That's a general view, not one that is specific right now. She doesn't have to suspect you right now to say this.
I'm not saying that I'm suspicious of Black Rock for it. I'm saying it was weird word choice.

You of all people know that word choice is important. You know that saying I'm sneaky in the thread might be a nice way to push a Dom lynch without supporting a Dom lynch.

And you just said you don't suspect her but then turned around and ascribed nefarious intentions to her choice of words....

ika wrote:
Silverwolf wrote:Also ika, explain your Space Daisy read? She's pretty null to me right now.

Sure, i found her entrance to be lackluster, not only that but at the time of her posting there was quite a bit of dicussion so for her to have the "no comments ot be made" feels like its sucm who is out of place

And why is Sorsha town? I don't even remember Sorsha.
I think it was something about the poilcy lynch or something i have to iso again, i think that and the fact (s)he is more invested then ricotech game

Two things:

1. I did not make no comments, I commented on the one thing I had an opinion worth expressing about. That thing was the forced Ld statements conversation which was one of maybe two major conversations.

2. I am a slow starter. I engage more/become more talkative the further along I get.

I do have one other thing to comment on, but you probably won't care for it ika. I think your conversation earlier regarding higher standards is highly flawed. In mafia, everyone has a different perspective, different approaches and different ways of thinking. I have often in my mafia career had times when someone seemed so bad to me because I could not see a civilian reason for their behavior. But in the end I found that a lot of it was simply because I looked at things one way and their thought processes led them to look at it in a completely different way. What I am saying is, you are judging everyone according to your standards/expectations, and you are not infallible. Your way is not the only right way. So I would assume you are holding me to a standard because of my role in this site as well and that this plays some part in your feelings about my entrance, but I not only think this is illogical and unfair of you, I also think it will bite you in the ass if you keep up this approach with people.

All that said, I think you and SW are likely civilians. You are just incorrect about me.

My only comments at this point is that Epi's refusal to make a lie detector statement says nothing to me about his alignment. I would have had the same response because I know on this site it is common to not allow straight up forced LD statements to be used. And honestly I would have had the same reaction as he did.

I have nothing else that jumps out at me yet, kind of early for me really.

Search found 101 matches