The Syndicate

Rico -didn't mean to not respond to your theory about bwt. I think it's Interesting. I defiantly am curious to see how teefies responds. As we can't vote him today if he is uzbeck, hadn't really thought to comment. I know that's super annoying though when you think you are on to something and nobody comments so I'm sorry.

I have laundry to put away but I'm in and out.

My problem with voting is that I am so on the fence about so many peeps. My strongest civ vibe I feel like I should hold to my chest so as to not target paint and everyone else reads "i have no fracking idea" about. Case in point, lorab, whom I love. I can see where she could be civ, unrecruited or bad. Trying my best to look past my personal meta and my personal bias to see what is objective.

Linki rox - is there something missing from timmers posts that might help you explain it better than tone?

Is there any response I could have given that would have eased your bad feeling lorab?

Take a look at me. By all means. As I said to Scotty days ago all you will find is a distracted unrecruited player. I feel bad about wilgy. I truly do. But his guess that I'm bad is incorrect.

Eeps that phone post is riddled with mistakes.

Feeling is mutual sweetie. Feels a little like you are saying I'm being too blend and unfocused because timer and th brought me up earlier. I'd say it's a bit pot and kettle here. You've defended for sure but have your contributions to the game that aren't defending been any more original and game moving than mine?

You can totes vote me, i get it, but all that is going to net the town is an unrecruited player lynched.

Gee. I thought that was bringing up something new and specific lorab.

I'm very sorry I was wrong about you wilgy.

I hope that Celia was right about SVS.

I appologize to everyone for my long absence. I know my participation has dropped significantly and hopefully I can try to make up for that. Please know that my dipping out was all RL and not because I have been recruited. I remain an unrecruited player. I do not hold anyone but myself accountable for my bad vote for wilgy. I jumped right on that train with no thought to anything but "fuck I have to vote right the fuck now!" Timmer is correct, I normally do not care to vote silenced players. I probably would not have voted for bubbles the day I missed that lynch following the same logic and I was wrong about bubbles.

You guys! srrsly! RL has moved from trying to kick my ass to flat out trying to make me suffer a heart attack. In the past week I've had a power outage which involved unpaid time transferring food too and fro to keep it from spoiling, a futile trek through the city of PHX trying to find dry ice, working my normal 50 hours, crazy business because apparently a day and a half without being able to order pizza threw my entire neighborhood into a frenzy plus long weekend, being called in early more than not, 6 call offs bause of illness in half as many days, broken phones, a broken walk in and computer issues because all of my tech at the store has been systematically breaking since we got power back up. Blah. This is the first day in about 3 weeks I've been able to sit down and catch my breath.

I pulled this list from aapje's post about wilgy's voteing patterns. Here's what was down for day 7.

SVS
LR
LA
Tranq
Synonym

I thought that at some point I'd read that he eventually went back to voting SVS at the time, but I guess I'm mistaking that.

Anyway - I am wondering, does anyone think he might have been signaling who he thinks SVS's potential teammates are with that vote? I could see him trying to say something with the way he was moving his vote around, but also he could have just been signaling he was silenced. Anyway, that's something that's been in the back of my mind for a bit during my catch up.

Been up since 9 on 4 hours sleep. Store is burning down yet again. 5 call offs in 2 days and now the phones are broke. Voting wily again because I'm not sure if I will make it back and because silence after not being lynched seems too convinent.

Scotty wrote:
bea wrote:I'm not gonna lie. I'm happy no one is talking about Mr but it worries me too. I have played so badly. Why given my vote misses etc aren't I a point of conversation?
Did you try and kill DH last night?

Nope. Only thing I tried to kill last night was my liver.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Voted 1

Why?

Still not quite sure how this lynch switch happened. I'm drunk. It's my first day off in 2 weeks I went with 3 because it seems like lots of peeps find it less offensive than the other options.

So much death last night!! Rip to all those that perished.

I got called in to work early today. Now that the power is back plus football, we have been crazy busy. I find myself agreeing with bullz lots today so imma follow his lead, and vote Dr wiggly . Sorry this is pretty drive by like.

don't wanna miss the vote again.

5 sounds lime a winner to me.

I'm not gonna lie. I'm happy no one is talking about Mr but it worries me too. I have played so badly. Why given my vote misses etc aren't I a point of conversation?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Thanks everyone who offered responses to that S~V~S question. I'll assess her at face value moving forward. I haven't suspected her much at all really, but she warrants a reassessment this deep into the game. Maybe later.

svs dersrves watching all the time. Like I said, I didn't agree with DH's reasons for suspecting her. It doesn't mean I'm convinced she's a civ.

DharmaHelper wrote:Anybody got any clue who might be on TinyBubbles team? When do we think she was recruited?

my first thought is not anyone who defended her. her team IMO was the peeps who actively avoided commenting on her. Those of us gong after here obviously weren't trying to be happy teammates with her. I don't think her defenders were her teammates. I think they lay in the peeps in the middle

but what do I know?

I get that and I've absolutely had no time to go look at page 1. I really just haven't dh.

I have a different thread reading style for reading svs and I'm not sure yet. That was the important bit you should have gotten.

I have no idea what anyone is taking about when rolls are concerned. It's one of the many reasons I've said - continually that I am a bad player this game. I was just typing up this response and had to stop to take a call from my store.

and now all of the linkie I thought I was responding to is like 10 posts before.

fuck. I just suck ok?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
bea wrote:
You guys I suck this game

Aw bea, at least you are still alive.

tbh - I think that's mostly pity. I'm ok with that btw. but my survival hasnt been because I've been playing awesomely and anyone who would say so is a fucking lier

linkie - dh -how so? while I may not agree with your reasons for thinking svs is bad where did I ever say I was solid she was good?

I am so sorry. The power to my store came up literally 30 minutes before poll closing time. I am the boss of that store I HAD to direct my crew to what needed to get gone tonight so we can be open tomorrow. I had to deal with trying to figure out when we are geting our cold food delivery and make plans for it not being there first thing in the am to be open for business. Those needs HAD to take precitdent to the game. I am SO SO SO SORRY.

LINKIE - omfg!!! I was right about tinybubbles111???!!!

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Open question about S~V~S for those who've played with her often:

Her tunnel vision on Golden was well-documented. Most people didn't seem perturbed by that, and my inclination as an observer without meta was to not be perturbed. However, it should be noted that her case against Golden seemed to be reduced entirely to a single post (in which Golden claimed to have baited the Epi kill).

Golden fought and fought to explain his maneuver and his perspective, but S~V~S never got over that post. Would you folks say that tunnel vision of such a focused sort is normal of S~V~S? Because that is a special sort of tunneling -- instead of hating everything Golden posted, she hated one thing he posted. Enough to drive him over 300 posts defending himself to no avail.

YUP. That's svs with a bone. I've been on the bad end of it too. She was usually wrong, but still it's the way she is. Her behavior here was not at all unexpected from me.

Also - the DH case now that we have it - going after svs is not suprising in hindsight. And nor is her reaction to it.

I"d hoped that DH saw something we didn't see. His case, I'm sorry DH - feels like going after the easy target. especially given that there is a history. It's like how I wasn't suprised that Dom latched onto MP at all.

I know I missed the vote again. Please hosts punish me. I feel so bad about it. I really really do.

You guys I suck this game

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:DH, if you could describe your desire to lynch S~V~S with one word, what would it be?

I mean the magnitude of your emotion. How strong is your desire?
I have two answers, but the one I'll use is Indomitable
It sounds like you might be starved for an S~V~S lynch.

I'm not so inclined at the moment.

so um...that was a really nice catch. maybe it is so maybe not I'm pretty sure dh isn't allowed to confirm it.

timmer wrote:Frankly Doc, I think aapje is correct. A baddie had a chance to switch a lynch. Why wouldn't he? It sows chaos and confusion. It's entirely likely that neither unfurl or Bubbles have any relevance to that player and they were chosen just 'coz.

I am more piqued by those who seem to think they understand the motivations behind the switch, because it could suggest background knowledge.

I agree with this.

Canucklehead wrote:While I fully acknowledge being one of the coal-shovellers on this Bubbles Lynch Train, the more passengers we acquire the more squicky I feel about it..... like, I'm starting to feel like I'm on the damn Snowpiercer and eating children and doing really unsubtle allegory and stuff.

that's how I felt Day 4 - then i missed the vote.

also - not related to cannucks post - but I am here and still exausted you guys - really -I should go write the epic saga of my two weeks somewhere. OMG you wouldn't believe this shit for realzies and now I'm drinking. So you know. There's that.

omg. 16 hour day yesterday, 4 hours sleep, left the house at 9 today got home at midnight. Have to get up at 6 so I can check on the no power situation at my store and see if I lost all my food in the walk in and/or do all the computer work so we can open on time. i. Cant. Brain. Anymore.

I'm sorry guys this is a place holder. I tried to read the timer case and I can't keep my eyes focused on it. I need some pasta, some cake , some mindless TV and a nap. *sigh*

Rip mp.
Impressive not dying lorab!

I'm sorry I effed up yet another vote.

weekends are absolutely insane for me and this one more so as I'm making the day shift to night shift switch.

I'm keeping up mostly by my phone even if I reading involved and quiet these past few days.
Many apologies to the hosts and players.

Rip unfurl.

Like everyone else, I'm trying to figure out if I fear poison or "mild conciquences" more.

Went with bubbles. This thread blew the eff up. Work crazy almost missed the vote. Omg I need dinner!!

@ svs - I didn't mean to imply that I was looking for something specific from you about golden. I know you feel badly for being wrong about him. I was just curious as to what catches your eye now because I value your imput. Sorry if I worded that weird before.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
bea wrote:Also - I'm totally cute and fun to have around and I've been away forever and everyone is super happy I'm playing for sure!!
My fear is that this is totally true, and thus...

bea wrote:also also - I'm still unrecruited fwiw.
This is less likely. :P

Please note evolution baddie mastermind is not listed in my awesomeness. Also while totes wifom, I have not been participating in contests. Too busy.

fwiw - Sorsha was a late recruit for me last game. She was the last one if I remember correctly. Her style in that game is similar to this. She is playing like I expect her to play both for recruitement, and in general. Her meta seems to match.

That said, it's always worth keeping an eye on her. She can move seamlessly from not recruited to recruited till it's too late. And maybe this game she started differently. IDK.

But yea - her meta matches up to what I expect from her.

re dom: I think he and LA are fighting a different fight.

I love you both, but it feels a bit like LA is splitting hairs about what she expects dom to do vs what he is doing. I thought I had Dom as a rainbow "orange" before this last post, but this last post feels genuine. So yea....

as far as fighting a different fight goes, I'll post a different one:

Lorab: During the end of the Golden lynch when she was talking about neutrals and how not to trust them and why not to trust them, I was all in my hed space being: But we did that end game!!! We're not endgame yet so neutrals are not by default "almost bad." We played that whole game civ till the last vote. You left out facts in your example!! I think you might be bad!!!

And then I cried some.

Reading her clarifications, I get what she is saying. Some people might play neutral to fight for civs. And early in the game, it's the safest choice. Some of us stick to it, and some of us would change in a heartbeat if we smelt the tide turning. And that - she is always correct about.

I agree with her point that a neutral death is still better than a civ death, even if that death were my own. Because it wasn't a civ.

Her clarifications changed my mind. When I started the catsup, I thought i'd have to try to figure out baddie lorab from the other side. I don't think it's there. Really.

I'm SUPER curious as to what is going on in SVS's mind post Golden lynch. I miss hearing about what she has to say about everyone else.

I'm concerned that people seem to be latching right on to the tinybubbles thing. Can't tell if it means I was on to something or if she's just the newest easy target. This concerns me. Especially as I was rethinking her just as people were latching on.

I'm happy that rey is still playing, and I totes understand needing to step away a bit. His break was a year, mine was a few months and I still feel like a noob kinda all over again. I an wait to hear what he has to say.

As far as DH goes, I feel like he feels like he is always in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. I think his game play this game has been reflective of that. If I am wrong, DH, please correct me and show me the error of my ways. IF not, I'd like a hug plzktks!

linkie - I would give my left hand for a multiquote button. Trustry.

posting then reading the rest of the linki.

bea wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:I also think it's dangerous to think that certain types of players are more or less apt to be recruited. We should be cautious of everyone. I, too, have been too closed-minded with regards to this.
I agree with this, I tried to say as much in the beginning of the game. Recuriters get less choice than people think in these games. You have a wish list for sure. My recriting last time around was different because I was rezzed into it so I think I got 2 peeps by choice. After that, it was a combination of "there's a contest for x" that the players did - only people who pariticipated in the contest were in the recruiting poll (that's how I got typh -he was literally the only one that applied for the spot.) - there were also things we as recruiters had to do - and then we could get first, second, third choice at a list of *roles* not people. On RM, there were many arcade based challenges. I have no idea wtf our crazy awesome insane hosts are making recruiters do bts to get their recruits. They like to switch things up - they like to keep even the most veteran veteran guessing what's going on. It's why Iove them so.

LINKI -Yes Dr Wiggly -it is my birthday as well. Black Rock and I are birthday sisters. Hence me coming out of retirement to play her game. Also you all have rightly been wishing her a happy birthday. She is amazing for taking on this thing as her "fun time with her hubby." for her birthday. I would have made my hubby take me far away from the interwebs if that were possible. :nod:

OMG you guys!! tag fail!!! It's like old times....sorry aapje for more spam. At least my return key works in this universe.

MovingPictures07 wrote:I also think it's dangerous to think that certain types of players are more or less apt to be recruited. We should be cautious of everyone. I, too, have been too closed-minded with regards to this.

I agree with this, I tried to say as much in the beginning of the game. Recuriters get less choice than people think in these games. You have a wish list for sure. My recriting last time around was different because I was rezzed into it so I think I got 2 peeps by choice. After that, it was a combination of "there's a contest for x" that the players did - only people who pariticipated in the contest were in the recruiting poll (that's how I got typh -he was literally the only one that applied for the spot.) - there were also things we as recruiters had to do - and then we could get first, second, third choice at a list of *roles* not people. On RM, there were many arcade based challenges. I have no idea wtf our crazy awesome insane hosts are making recruiters do bts to get their recruits. They like to switch things up - they like to keep even the most veteran veteran guessing what's going on. It's why Iove them so.

[Yes Dr Wiggly -it is my birthday as well. Black Rock and I are birthday sisters. Hence me coming out of retirement to play her game.

Also you all have rightly been wishing her a happy birthday. She is amazing for taking on this thing as her "fun time with her hubby." for her birthday. I would have made my hubby take me far away from the interwebs if that were possible.

:nod: /OT]

Synonym wrote:Good morning Syndicate,

I have no idea who I've replaced but I'm probably going to be more active so that's a positive.

Trying to figure out the nuances of this site so bear with me for a phase or so. I'm guessing the giant pole at the top is how we vote? Are we allowed to change votes or is it a lock once you choose one?

Welcome Syn!! Thanks for replacing in!! I do not envy your catch up.

@ aapje - fwiw - I'm trying to keep my night spamming of the thread to a minimum. Sorry if I am the fail at that.

I do understand the epic catch up though. I had like 10 pages to crank through when I got home from work....

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I need to reassess bea too. Sorry for the thinking outloud filler posts, these are for me to see later as reminders.

That's not a bad idea TBH. If you did an ISO post on me, you'd find a lot of fluff and some one or two cent additions here or there but no real major contributions given my post count. Due to my work schedule, I often miss the "as it happens stuff" and just kinda slam catch up posts in when no one else is still around. Like now. I struggle between trying to find a balance between spamming the thread and saying meaningful things. It's still a work in progress.

Also - I'm totally cute and fun to have around and I've been away forever and everyone is super happy I'm playing for sure!!

also also - I'm still unrecruited fwiw.

nutella wrote:Btw, I totally forgot Tranq was playing. He hasn't posted since Night 2. Tranq where are you?

THIS!! THIS!! SO MUCH THIS!!! A quiet, game playing, contest winning Dutchie skerrs me to to core tbh.
I was waiting to the end to post my "OMG, I forgot that Tranq was playing. No one should ever forget Tranq is playing!!" post, but hot damn LA - it's like you're in my head during this catch up. I find myself agreeing with you more than I don't.

I also find myself agreeing with Rox too, which is just a bit weird since she thinks you are bad.

linki - I love loopy lorab! Best birfday prezzie yet!!!

:twirl:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'd appreciate it if a lot of you folks could share your take on my exchange with Boomslang during this phase. It's a serious infraction for me, but I don't want to tunnel him hard based on one thing (shades of S~V~S on Golden). You folks can help me decide whether I am making too much of a fuss about it.

TBH, JJJ - I kinda lost track of what was going on once it started to get into semantics.

LoRab wrote:
bea wrote: all hail black rock!!!!!
Wait...BR is the Glow Cloud?! *mind esplodes*

Seriously, though. Happy birthday Black Rock!!!!

You sound surprised lorab, TBH I'm surprised you didn't see this coming...

Br is the glow cloud ALL HAIL!!!

Golden wrote:I miss drunk bea posts.

lol -this whole time I've been drinking...just trying to be smarter about it.

also - did I mention it''s Black Rock's birthday!!! all hail black rock!!!!!

I honestly think that everyone playing this game should take a second and wish Black Rock a happy birthday.

She chose to spend her birthday hosting us with her hubby rather than making him do something else.

dead or alive - it's east coast Black Rock's birthday!!!

after that, I'm willing to jump back into the game.

HAPPY HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO THE HOSTESS WITH THE MOSTEST!!!!

I love you more than words can say

I'm sorry you died Golden.

I'm sorry to Thunder too.

Thanks for the feedback on bubbles siesta and golden. Both if you brought up things I hadn't concidered.

I have to work this afternoon, but I will keep reading along as I can. Don't be surprised if my vote is quick and not well explained.

ok - so here's the thing with me personally about tiny bubbles.

she got a vote from llama day one that she never really addressed except to say "OMG obviously I was joking! Silly llama." (I'm of course paraphrasing) - then got 3 more votes day 2 for kinda dropping out.

Comes back day 3 and jumps into omg I can't vote golden 2 days in a row, I'll vote the person he says I should because he said I should even though I voted him the day before. Never once in her posts today does she acknowledge that she got 3 votes yesterday or why she got them. If I got 3 votes, I'd be looking at why. That's just me.

My point - rox - is not that I'm jumping on this one thing she said - it's that she's new to me and I have no idea how to read her. I've asked for more of her thinking, and voted her to try to get her to give me more of her thinking and she's ignored that despite the fact that I was one of the 3 people that voted her. That causes me to think that she's playing he "If I don't acknowledge votes, they'll go away" blend in stratigy. I don't know if it's true or not, but I can't know if it's not addressed. Ya dig?

rey and golden.

I have felt frustrated enough to self vote before. Most notably in my blowup during Death Note. TH implored me not to do it and I just went ahead and did it anyway.

Rey - who else besides golden could be bad?

Golden - who else besides the people you have been defending against do you think might be up to no good?

thellama73 wrote:So no one else thinks DharmaHelper is a shifty robot but me?

I have a past history of notoriously finding bad in DH that doesn't exist to the point of thinking he said things he didn't.

I'm trying to keep an open and cautious mind about him.

Sorsha wrote:I see that golden is heading out and might not be back much but I have a question or two. Anyone else can weigh in on the answer as well. I have been away from mafia for a while and don't know/can't remember all the player dynamics.

First of all I'm of the mind that golden is not on the team that killed epi night one. I know golden still claims responsibility like that team is going to do his bidding for him but I'd think their motive was more to frame him. Anyone in particular come to mind as one who would do that?

My thoughts on the matter is whoever is really hounding golden in the thread did it. But is it a silly question to ask who would set golden up?

I think they are both legit questions. Sadly I think the answer to "who would set up golden?" is "anyone who's ever played with golden or epi or both." which is pretty much all of us. Some of us as baddies would have done the set up and pushed to make golden look bad. Some of us would have set up golden and sat back and giggled as others fell for the bait.

I think the question as far as golden goes, is if any of is accusers have nefarious motives which ones are they? Is someone pushing an agenda or are they all being manipulated? I don't have an answer for that question either, but it's what's currently on my mind.

nutella wrote:Yeah, I think the point Canuck is trying to make is that he could easily be recruited right after being rezzed.

or recruited as part of his rez. I still read Golden's comments as Golden not playing a recruitment game before and not understanding all the insane possible ways our hosts have of messing with our expectations. fwiw.

LoRab wrote:
Golden wrote:Registering a vote for golden

Because I just can't be bothered any more.

All of those of you who insist I'm bad, I ask only that you remember this game for next time, primarily because I have literally been honest about every single thing, because you have used semantics against me, and because there are a lot of you who think you know me a lot better than you do (and I'd call epi chief among them, but I have to admit I'm surprised at how much SVS has misjudged my motives this game). And most of all because there are a lot of people tunnelling me who are wilfully deaf to all the responses I have given.

I also wish people would think about this, because it's important. I take heat from the start of every single game. So does MP. So does epi, to be fair. At some point, people ought to realise that we are taking heat solely for speaking a lot. If you speak a lot, it's guaranteed you will say something suspicious. The only way you can judge whether or not that suspicion is accurate, though, is to actually listen to people's defenses. There is a lot of evidence from those suspecting me this game that they are ignoring most of what I have to say, most of what MP has to say etc. Sometimes people aren't even secret about it. They skim the high posters. I only take this much heat because I speak a lot. The best reaction I could possibly make to this game to adjust so as to survive is to not be honest. You know what? I could have just lied about the fact I was trying to get the baddies to lynch epi. I didn't need to bring it up. It would have been in MY best interests never to say it. But that's just not what I think is in the towns interests. Being honest is better.

I'm travelling for most of this day anyway, and then I'm on holiday for 11 days, and I have no intention of spending my holiday stressed out defending myself. Good luck. I think the civs will need it.

PS - Rey's suspicion of me is literally bullsuit. When you've seen me flip, take my advice and lynch him next.

(Yes, this is permission for everyone to lynch me. Let me be very clear though, I WILL be playing for rezzes, in fact I'll be working hard for them. Right now, I think being lynched so that you can all see you are wrong is my best outcome, so that I can try and get back into the game with everyone having got this out of their system. Trust me though, when I'm back, if rey is alive he is going down).

PPS - hey, baddie team that killed epi. Fancy a DH kill tonight?

I'm tempted to vote for you, not so much because I think you've been recruited to the baddies--I don't actually. I think you're still unrecruited neutral. But I don't think you're playing in the best interest of the civies at this point. And I think that discussion of you is becoming a distraction from focusing on actually finding baddies.

Spacedaisy wrote:
nutella wrote:Guys don't freak out, LC answered somewhere that the thread lock would only be 4-6 hours.

Still good to register early votes though. I'd consider a vote for Rey since I could totally see him having killed Epi.

Spacedaisy wrote:Ok Nutella will be much simpler, no spoiler quotes. The thing with Nutella is that she always reads blends to me when she is civ. Always. And I have said before, I'll say it again, if I get good feels from Nutella, she is probably bad. If I get baddie vibes from Nutella, she is probably good. I don't like that reading back over her posts I see confident Nutella. Confident Nutella usually = Baddie Nutella. Read her posts, while she does change her mind,she doesn't read as uncertain as she does when she is a civ. They are more clear straight forward stances with less of the waffling that usually gets her lynched as a civ.

If I was putting her in a rainbow list, I would have her as orange.
I think I haven't come across as waffley this game because of its setup. We started out with a majority of players being unrecruited, so I basically assumed most people were unrecruited, rather than being pressured into having civ or baddie reads of people, which are always difficult early in the game. It's not that I'm not uncertain about a lot of players, it's that the things I've been talking about are the things I have stronger convictions about. In more typical games that start out with full civvie and baddie teams, there's a lot more pressure in the thread to decide on stuff like rainbow lists and a definitive perspective on players who are under scrutiny, and that's the stuff that I tend to waffle on and get in trouble for (and btw @ Lorab yes in fact I have still been getting lynched as a civ for these reasons in the last couple games I've played recently). In this game I'm just observing things on my own, and there are certainly players/topics of discussion in the thread that I don't have strong opinions of either way.

That said, I don't agree with your suspicion of Unfurl, I think she is genuine.
This answer made me feel miles better about you. It was the set up with neutrals at the start that kept me from feeling 100% about you, and I didn't mention it because I wanted to see how you would respond. This rings true to me.

Lorab, your response about her age doesn't hold water for me because in the recent games I have played with her this meta has still been there. That is not to say her game play hasn't evolved, she is a great player for sure, but even in the last game I played with her she herself admitted to this meta? She was explaining why she comes across blendy, they didn't believe her, she got lynched and flipped civ.
Good to know. I haven't played with her for a while. and she attests to he same patterns. I will keep this in mind.

By the bolded part do you mean that everyone who keeps bringing up Golden suspish is also civ or unrecruited? Could there be no baddie manipulation from the people who keep keeping his name in the conversation?

Scotty wrote:
aapje wrote:
Scotty wrote:A name that pop up to me as I read his posts:
aapje
aapje wrote:So what is up with DF and DP? DF has missed both polls and DP hasn't contributed anything so far. I honestly wouldn't mind lynching either of them. If we are lynching neutrals anyway we might as well get rid of people who aren't really playing the game to begin with

I gave Russtifinko a pass since he asked to be replaced.
I disagree with the strategy of lynching no-shows this game. While they haven't been strictly no-shows, and I usually operate under the mode of "Come to play" I thought we were actively looking for baddies, not just neutrals. As a matter of fact, the more we look at lynching neutrals, the longer the bad recruiters have chances of recruiting more people.
No if they were total no shows they would be modkilled / replaced. Although I have good hopes of DF missing his 3rd vote in a row
Also if the last recruitment games are any indication all teams have a limited number of recruits.

Scotty wrote:
Spoiler: show
aapje wrote:
Golden wrote:I agree entirely. I'm not really sure why TH has votes, to me it is pretty much on the same place on the curve as random. Although someone like G-Man is not basing it solely on the Speaker.
I can see why people could be suspicious of TH.

Turnip Head wrote:I don't want to be recruited. Y'all better leave me alone.
Could it be he doesn't want people to try and recruit him because he's already on a team?

Turnip Head wrote:All the recruiters are equally naughty. What makes half of them more civvie than the others, other than that's what we're told to call them? They all seem nearly equal in power.
Doesn't sound very civvie minded either.

All in all not a whole lot to go on but I can see why people would consider voting for him.

I had to manually create linkbacks for this post like some kind of peasant
He lists reasons why "people" would be suspicious of voting TH, and even admits that he "doesn't sound very civvie minded either"
He follows this up by VOTING FOR DisgruntledPorcupine for not posting.

When TH responds with a "yeah, it wasn't a very civ-thing to say," aapje says:
aapje wrote:Fair enough. Wasn't planning on voting for you over it anyway. Was just checking what you actually said when people were voting for you.
Ho-hum. To state that he thinks something sounds not civ-like to immediately discrediting himself when TH literally admits to such claims is sketchy at best. It's not enough to warrant a vote, ok. But to say he wasn't going to vote for him at all for sketchy behavior raises my red sails.
Here is the full response TH made:
Turnip Head wrote:You're right, it wasn't a very civvie minded thing to say. It was a neutral thing to say.

And I don't want to be recruited yet because I like keeping my options open. I played RM I and III, and this is the first time I've made it past Night 0 without a team. It's quite liberating. Team Neutral 4 Life yo.
A reply which made sense to me. As you have already noticed, I am not yet in baddie hunting mode. I'm sure I will get around to it, if I had to guess I'd say somewhere after the weekend. As for now I'd rather get rid of some non-contributors.
This comes off as baddie to me because you're still making compromises like it's Day 1, but it is not. There are ample posts in this thread so far that could give you info to baddie-hunt. The fact that you are just openly choosing not to baddie hunt is troubling to me.

Our strategies are very different, and you could just come back and say as such and move on. But in your strategy, you're picking off people that talk very little. That is not only the easiest fallback option if you're bad, but also the longer we wait to look for scum, the more scum will be recruited. I think you understand that reasoning, and are just choosing to ignore it. It doesn't make sense to me if you are good.

See...to me, aapje's stragagy kinda makes sense. If he's not recruited, he's not activley baddie hunting because he might yet be a baddie. He's not actively trying to lynch people he thinks are civ because he's not yet a civ. If he were a recruiter or already recruited, he's tying to play like he's not because most of us haven't been yet at day 3. And it's still numerically the neutrals that out weigh the factions. (right? i did the maths right here? I suck at the maths so I could have effed that up.) Low posters vote is the most netural spot one could be in really....

TinyBubbles wrote:damn it, i just can't vote golden again. i don't care if he's a baddie or not, it feels like rejecting a friend. he's totally right about him and other talkative players like MP and epi getting heat just for talking, rather than for the content of their posts. it isn't right,and the game would be dead in the water without their input, i don't think anyone should be punished for posting a lot, even though it obviously makes them a bigger target.

hope you have a good trip golden! i wont vote you out though!!!
and i know my own arguments are flipping back and forth but thats what happens when you get emotionally invested in a game like this ><

voting rey on golden's testimony

I'm having a hard time seeing where you are emotionally invested in this game. I'm sure it's my fault and not knowing you or your play style.

Are you voting rey soley because Golden (whom you voted for last round) thinks he's bad?

Who do you think is bad? And why?

I know, I have no clear answers to those questions myself. But voting someone soley because someone else thinks it's a good idea doesn't feel like a move from someone who is - as you said - emotionally invested in the game.

Awe. Bye gman.

Search found 161 matches