[ENDGAME]: Film Directors.

[Dom]

I think I'm understanding SVS completely clear right now. Thank you.

Why did everyone just pile onto, then fall off SVS in one collective swing???

As far as I know, BR is the only one who's been drinking.

SVS responded in a way I consider consistent with her civvie persona.

[FZ.]

Question: Has Sabie even posted this game? How do I check if someone posted on this thread?

If the fact there was no NK the result of a block, would the baddie blocked, sit quiet for the start of the day and see what people are saying to not gain too much attention, and make the blocker think it wasn't his/her block that prevented the kill,or would the baddie be more likely to talk fast?
I think I would wait some before I started talking, just to see if someone mentions my name. So I want to look into the people who started talking relatively late in the last 24 hours. I hope I have time to do it before I need to leave.

[Long Con]

The baddie would likely act normal, like nothing had happened?

[FZ.]

The baddie would likely act normal, like nothing had happened?

True, but he would still be a little more careful, no?

[timmer]

Okay, I hope this isn't a mistake, but I'm going to vote for BWT, because I see no point in voting for anyone else at this time.

I've just finished rereading Day 1.1 and this is the one thing that jumped out as being something I hadn't noticed last time. FZ had only talked about the other cases, especially Long Con, and yet just idly jumped onto the bandwagon? Sure, maybe if you vote someone late in the lynch they won't die, but it marks your feelings about the day. Just adding to a bandwagon is a funny thing to do. This is something I will remember for future reference. Moving onto Day 1.2.

[FZ.]

Okay, I hope this isn't a mistake, but I'm going to vote for BWT, because I see no point in voting for anyone else at this time.

I've just finished rereading Day 1.1 and this is the one thing that jumped out as being something I hadn't noticed last time. FZ had only talked about the other cases, especially Long Con, and yet just idly jumped onto the bandwagon? Sure, maybe if you vote someone late in the lynch they won't die, but it marks your feelings about the day. Just adding to a bandwagon is a funny thing to do. This is something I will remember for future reference. Moving onto Day 1.2.

I said that I understood why people were feeling he was bad because of him seeming to just want to vote Vomp no matter what, and when I saw that none of the people I wanted to vote for in the first place was going to get lynched, I voted for the next person I thought seemed fishy. If I were a baddie, voting for him at that time, would have been the stupidest thing to do. Am while there are smarter people than me, I'm not that stupid

[timmer]

If I were a baddie, voting for him at that time, would have been the stupidest thing to do. Am while there are smarter people than me, I'm not that stupid

LOL, that's what WIFOM is all about. "I can't bad, because I would never do that when I am bad!"

I'm not really suspecting you atm, I simply hadn't seen that post the previous time I reread 1.1.

[timmer]

I was talking more about Timmer. I don't see how my alignment or MP's alignment would influence the other. I don't see how my alignment would influence LC's alignment. I do, however, see how MP's alignment might be linked to LC's. However, this is not quite what Timmer said.

I'm blasting through the MP/Dom stuff again, and saw this. Part of it could be blinders, but I feel that MP's posts feel like he was trying to keep himself as the centre of attention somehow, while your posts more often sounded like you were simply responding to him. Thus the fact that Long Con seemed to see it as the opposite made me feel like MP and LC may both be bad, or at least that if MP flips bad that LC my represent a teammate. It doesn't really make you a civ, but it keeps you in neutral at this point.

[timmer]

Dang it, i have to leave... but honestly I don't feel inclined to vote AP or Vomps.

Well, screw it. I know it seems like a waste, but I just don't know about Vomps or AP, so I'm putting my vote where I really feel it should go -- and that is BR. I know others have said this is normal for her but I'm still pinged that she would pour oil on three fires without giving any real good reasons for it.

Let's recap.

Before MP voted, AP had 3 votes, Vompatti had 3 votes, MP himself was at 2 votes, Dom 1 vote, FZ, Daisy, the llama and Long Con 1 vote each.

First of all, I'm pinged by the fact that MP made no mention that he had taken on votes and was 1 shy of being the lynch leader at the time.
Second, i'm pinged by the fact that he posted this before his vote

I don't know what's going on with Vomps but it seems he is purposefully trying to act more zany due to the accusations against him.

and yet wouldn't vote Vomps to help save his own self.

third, and most important, after ALL the back and forth, no mention at ALL of voting Dom?

MP's vote choice makes me feel more sure that he is likely bad. I feel like this is someone who wasn't too fearful of getting lynched, because he had some friends. i feel like Alex has been so posty and wordy in the game up to this vote moment, that it is baffling that he would make no mention of the risk he was in. Not a single "come on guys, don't fucking lynch me for being posty".

As of this point in my read back, MP remains my #1 ping with a bullet.

[timmer]

BUT if I vote MP and one of the other two is lynched and flips bad, my vote will (quite reasonably) be deemed opportunistic, so I have to consider that risk when casting my vote as well...

Linki how hard MM what

Voting for MP and one of AP/Vomps flips bad, sure, your vote could look baddie. But you know what else looks baddie? Waiting until AP is at 5 votes, and putting your vote on MP *then*, with the second to last vote, once the lynch seems secured. And that's what you did.

[timmer]

There Will Be Blood is overrated...

So is Daniel Day-Lewis.

THAT's RIGHT, I SAID IT. HE IS.

You just go and fuck right off, k?

[timmer]

While I'm dissing beloved actors... Meryl Streep is fucking awful.[/ot]

You just go and... oh no wait, you're cool. Carry on.

[timmer]

I have to study the Vomps case, as promised, and maybe look back at everything posted by SVS, since there's a big case brewing on her, apparently.

This is a bit pingy. This, considering Rico wouldn't go find evidence of it for SVS, sounds like baddies had been chatting all night in btsc and "the plan" was to push the SVS angle.

[timmer]

There has been a lot of talk about a lot of people, interesting that the only big case coming that you see is on me.

Which other members are you referring to? I am beginning to think that maybe you heard about this big case in your chatroom.

Now I am looking forward to seeing who presents the big case

Haha, exactly. ^

[timmer]

As for SVS, I'm not saying everyone's reasoning is the one I mentioned, but it seems to be building up too fast and people seem to be jumping on that with the "look how she's avoiding answering the questions" train of thought. In contrast, look how hard it is to get people to view the Vompatti case. I wonder why it's so much easier to jump on the SVS case

This is becoming quite an interesting read! First, SVS correctly nailed the tone of Rico's post, I think. It's weird. But, FZ defending seems a bit weak here as well. It's building up too fast? Sometimes a case causes that because there is logic behind it. But it can make a teammate panic. FWIW, I think SVS' votes in the two lynches could def. be the sign of a baddie at work, but there are too many variables atm for me to vote that way. I prefer to vote people in relation to proven baddies, not based on the idea that a save is going on when that has yet to be determined.

But considering how MP has now been gunning for SVS (Dom is now completely off his radar?) I wouldn't be shocked if this were two baddie teams duking it out (svs/fz) vs )mp/rico) along with various divs mixed in. Or it could all end up differently, I'm not done the read.

[timmer]

That's good to know Roxy. Glad you decided to keep playing!

That changes things. Also note, one roleblocker wouldn't have taken effect last night.

I'm sure it's addressed in the future of my read, but in case it isn't, I'd like to know what this means. I see no mention of either role blocker being an alternating power or anything.

[timmer]

I have had minor pings of Dom and FZ. earlier in the game, but neither of them are on my baddie radar at all right now.

Important to note, that while I still feel MP is playing a baddie-ish game, both he and Dom seemed to drop their fight awful quick. I'm not sure what that means that both just gave it up like that. It's weird.

[Ricochet]

I have to study the Vomps case, as promised, and maybe look back at everything posted by SVS, since there's a big case brewing on her, apparently.

This is a bit pingy. This, considering Rico wouldn't go find evidence of it for SVS, sounds like baddies had been chatting all night in btsc and "the plan" was to push the SVS angle.

I do understand what could seem pingy about my exchange with SVS, but I'd argue that it was all very unfortunate and a misinterpretation of my intentions - which was to simply say look into what others have said. To say I was out to "push a SVS angle", after "btsc team chats", would be to ignore the fact that the angle was already being pushed and discussed by several people in the thread.

The fact that I didn't quote "evidence" for her (although I did motivate that I had to leave soon) or that I referenced page numbers instead of quoting the relevant posts - I'd call it another rookie lapse on my behalf (just like, on Day 1, I was pointed out that I shouldn't snip player's posts, because it might make me look bad), for which I apologize. Would I have not been pressured by time, or be aware that it's preferable to quote rather than say "go read page x", I would have done so, obviously. When I came back, I offered to quote any other fragments SVS might still require, but llama already pointed out to her what was the most significant part.

[S~V~S]

Did Llama offered you the quotes you wanted, SVS? That was the main issue I was referencing, myself, anyway. I still find it intriguing that you would have read all that and not want to address it, missing or not any direct questions.

He did

Tell him I said Thanks!

Nah, just kidding. Maybe.

I did address them (thanks for letting me know I needed to before the big case). How do you plan on voting, Ricochet?

[Ricochet]

Did Llama offered you the quotes you wanted, SVS? That was the main issue I was referencing, myself, anyway. I still find it intriguing that you would have read all that and not want to address it, missing or not any direct questions.

He did

Tell him I said Thanks!

Nah, just kidding. Maybe.

I did address them (thanks for letting me know I needed to before the big case). How do you plan on voting, Ricochet?

I could consider a vote for Voopy, but even that I find very difficult, because I can't actually read much into his defence/pretence. Knowing Vomps outside the forum as well, his random way of going back and forth between pretending to be bad and "no wait guys I'm just joking don't kill me" doesn't really tell me which way is it. At this point, I feel that if Vompatti is lynched, it could go either way. Literally 50-50.

There's one post that made a curious statement. I know FZ. is leaning on calling Vomps bad and voting him, but still

Hi, I'm not going to be around much this day. I'll be here a bit later today, and then tomorrow morning my time, when you're all asleep. And then I'm gone. Right now, I still want to vote Vomp, and I also said in my post where I analysed the votes that if Vomp is bad, the timing of SVS' vote seemed most like a save (though I did mention some other names as well). I think I suck at reading SVS, so based on her posts alone, I can't see anything that screams baddie to me. I think that lynching Vomp would give us more information after how the lynch went down, even if he's civ. Because if he is, I can see the baddies spreading their votes more.

What are people's opinion of Bass, by the way?

Are certain civs expendable? Am I just reading this wrong?

[S~V~S]

No certain civs are not expendable, although that is not the point i think FZ is making. She means that even if Vomps is a civ, this lynch will give us alot of direction. For instance, one of the reasons Llama had for suspecting me was that he felt I was saving Vomps. Yet Vomps is not proven baddie. So if he flips bad, then we know some of those AP voters may have been attempting a save. If he flips civ, we will know there was no malicious intent in the AP voters, and that we might be better off looking elsewhere. I am not sure I agree with this approach, but it is not a baddie thought, imo, and if it was i don't think she would have said it in thread, lol. FZ doesn't much pull punches.

The last two lynches of civs were kinda thrown together; had I not been spooked by MM (and oddly, MM is having the opposite effect on me this lynch; him defending yet another shredder, Vomps, is making me leery of voting for Vomps, lol. Maybe it's the burn factor) I doubt i would have voted for AP. We have tried to make direction from them, but personally I think it more likely the baddies avoided those wagons. I know I was not trying to save Vomps, I was even considering a vote for him. Llama is always 100% positive, yet often wrong, like someone else I know Day 1.0, for instance, he seemed fairly sure you were bad, now it seems not so much.

Now I have just enough time to catch up to where I left off last night.

That's good to know Roxy. Glad you decided to keep playing!

That changes things. Also note, one roleblocker wouldn't have taken effect last night.

I'm sure it's addressed in the future of my read, but in case it isn't, I'd like to know what this means. I see no mention of either role blocker being an alternating power or anything.

Yeah, I did not see that either. Although I think Mongoose clarification made it a less likely scenario.

As for SVS, I'm not saying everyone's reasoning is the one I mentioned, but it seems to be building up too fast and people seem to be jumping on that with the "look how she's avoiding answering the questions" train of thought. In contrast, look how hard it is to get people to view the Vompatti case. I wonder why it's so much easier to jump on the SVS case

This is becoming quite an interesting read! First, SVS correctly nailed the tone of Rico's post, I think. It's weird. But, FZ defending seems a bit weak here as well. It's building up too fast? Sometimes a case causes that because there is logic behind it. But it can make a teammate panic. FWIW, I think SVS' votes in the two lynches could def. be the sign of a baddie at work, but there are too many variables atm for me to vote that way. I prefer to vote people in relation to proven baddies, not based on the idea that a save is going on when that has yet to be determined.

But considering how MP has now been gunning for SVS (Dom is now completely off his radar?) I wouldn't be shocked if this were two baddie teams duking it out (svs/fz) vs )mp/rico) along with various divs mixed in. Or it could all end up differently, I'm not done the read.

I look forward to your opinion about this when you finish your catch up.

[FZ.]

What bothers me about TImmer's read is that it seems very easy going back to catch up and just find something fishy about everyone. It makes you look like you're not leaving any stone unturned and gives a baddie hunting feel. It's something I do a lot as a baddie. But if you notice, Timmer isn't committing to anything yet and is just delaying it all to "when he finishes reading". Not sure I like what I'm seeing

[thellama73]

No certain civs are not expendable, although that is not the point i think FZ is making. She means that even if Vomps is a civ, this lynch will give us alot of direction. For instance, one of the reasons Llama had for suspecting me was that he felt I was saving Vomps. Yet Vomps is not proven baddie. So if he flips bad, then we know some of those AP voters may have been attempting a save. If he flips civ, we will know there was no malicious intent in the AP voters, and that we might be better off looking elsewhere. I am not sure I agree with this approach, but it is not a baddie thought, imo, and if it was i don't think she would have said it in thread, lol. FZ doesn't much pull punches.

The last two lynches of civs were kinda thrown together; had I not been spooked by MM (and oddly, MM is having the opposite effect on me this lynch; him defending yet another shredder, Vomps, is making me leery of voting for Vomps, lol. Maybe it's the burn factor) I doubt i would have voted for AP. We have tried to make direction from them, but personally I think it more likely the baddies avoided those wagons. I know I was not trying to save Vomps, I was even considering a vote for him. Llama is always 100% positive, yet often wrong, like someone else I know Day 1.0, for instance, he seemed fairly sure you were bad, now it seems not so much.

YOu know who's been avoiding bandwagons? Vompatti.

Also, yes, I am frequently wrong, but one of these days I'll be right and it will all be worthwhile!

[FZ.]

Here is DF's post regarding the NK. I think this is his only post of the day

I've finally just about caught up! I think it's very odd that Sabie would be targeted for an NK so early in the game, and even weirder if someone decided to protect her. I'm thinking Sabie herself probably was the cause of her survival.

I don't have a read on Vomps, but I don't necessarily think Llama is suspicious for looking at him. And I'm not clear on why SVS thinks there is a connection between AP and MM.

Interestingly, he is going for the "save" explanation. But I think this was before Mongoose answered the question about the stories and the kills. So not sure what to make of it. DF is not posting much, and if he's a baddie, it will be his third time in a row. He said he doesn't like being a baddie 2 times in a row (last game), so I wonder if that's the case here.

[thellama73]

A lot of people are saying that Sabie was a weird night kill choice. I don't really think she was. It's common to kill less participatory players, because the civs can't make much out of it or draw conclusions, and those players are never going to get lynched anyway.

[Ricochet]

No certain civs are not expendable, although that is not the point i think FZ is making. She means that even if Vomps is a civ, this lynch will give us alot of direction. For instance, one of the reasons Llama had for suspecting me was that he felt I was saving Vomps. Yet Vomps is not proven baddie. So if he flips bad, then we know some of those AP voters may have been attempting a save. If he flips civ, we will know there was no malicious intent in the AP voters, and that we might be better off looking elsewhere. I am not sure I agree with this approach, but it is not a baddie thought, imo, and if it was i don't think she would have said it in thread, lol. FZ doesn't much pull punches.

The last two lynches of civs were kinda thrown together; had I not been spooked by MM (and oddly, MM is having the opposite effect on me this lynch; him defending yet another shredder, Vomps, is making me leery of voting for Vomps, lol. Maybe it's the burn factor) I doubt i would have voted for AP. We have tried to make direction from them, but personally I think it more likely the baddies avoided those wagons. I know I was not trying to save Vomps, I was even considering a vote for him. Llama is always 100% positive, yet often wrong, like someone else I know Day 1.0, for instance, he seemed fairly sure you were bad, now it seems not so much.

YOu know who's been avoiding bandwagons? Vompatti.

Also, yes, I am frequently wrong, but one of these days I'll be right and it will all be worthwhile!

Interesting. Is that what you make of Vomps' vote for Dom? I think he [V], AP and MP* were tied at 2 votes at that point (*Dom's vote for MP is the only one I can't trace, judging from the posts, when it happened, so it could have been 1 or 2 votes for MP).

[FZ.]

I need to go in a few minutes. I want to vote for Vomp for the reasons I stated before, but the one thing that's holding me back is the way the lynch went down. It didn't seem to bother anyone that he might be lynched. It could be that the baddies were waiting to see if he got enough votes and when they saw AP was going down, just went and voted for someone else. There's also the possibility that the last voters for AP are baddies, or at least one of them, but that would get them a lot of attention if Vomps flips baddie, so it's a risk.
But it seemed to go really slowly, which makes me wonder if we're not going after a civ again.

If anyone wants to suggest anything, speak now, because I'll be placing my vote in a minute or so

[Ricochet]

Here is DF's post regarding the NK. I think this is his only post of the day

I've finally just about caught up! I think it's very odd that Sabie would be targeted for an NK so early in the game, and even weirder if someone decided to protect her. I'm thinking Sabie herself probably was the cause of her survival.

I don't have a read on Vomps, but I don't necessarily think Llama is suspicious for looking at him. And I'm not clear on why SVS thinks there is a connection between AP and MM.

Interestingly, he is going for the "save" explanation. But I think this was before Mongoose answered the question about the stories and the kills. So not sure what to make of it. DF is not posting much, and if he's a baddie, it will be his third time in a row. He said he doesn't like being a baddie 2 times in a row (last game), so I wonder if that's the case here.

I honestly don't know what to make of inactive players, at this point. I think DF, Lizzy and Sabie are the only ones who still qualify as that, with Sabie being definitely the most inactive (I've examined why right after the failed NK). I did believe AP was inactive throughout the first two Days (and so it proved, sadly) and I do believe Sabie is genuinely inactive, so she didn't save herself or plotted a baddie stunt. So I'm not inclined right now to suspect the other inactive players, either. Of course, in the end I could be tricked in this reasoning by at least one of them, but I can't read much further into this right now.

[Ricochet]

*Oh, silly me. I should have checked the poll results for the order (I manually revisited the topic instead). Dom's vote for MP was before Vomps votes. So it was a three-way tie.

[FZ.]

I'm voting now for Vomp, but I still want to know:
1. Why Bass thinks MM is a baddie? (so much that he voted for him when so many people had at least one vote)
2. Why did MM vote LC when he didn't have any votes. Basically the same question that I asked Bass.
3. What do you all make of DF voting as the last voter for himself. What's the point in even voting if you didn't have time to read? He had time to come and say that he doesn't have time, so he's voting for himself, and conveniently, it was after AP was almost a sure bet for the lynch. And then he comes in after the night and says Sabie probably saved herself.

linki: what are you saying?

[FZ.]

Oh, so you think that if there was a save, it was MP and not Vomp?

[Roxy]

SVS - I hope I was not the one who you thought was rude. I hate to even say this but you still have not answered my only question. I guess at this point it does not matter but I would have liked a response and your thoughts about the other people who used your reasoning for their vote for Teeth.

I cannot believe no one has one word to say about Made. I mean his play style is so unlike Python and so reminiscence of his baddie game.

Here is a linky to all his posts I would like to hear what others are thinking about his game.

BR - can you elaborate a bit more? You seem to be tossing a lot of names about without really backing up as to why you think them suspicious.

[Ricochet]

Oh, so you think that if there was a save, it was MP and not Vomp?

I replied to llama earlier on the page, but then corrected my knowledge of how the votes stood when Vomps voted. I suppose everyone suspecting MP could read into the three-way tie could see a save in this direction as well.

[Ricochet]

could see into the three-way tie a save in this direction [MP's] as well*

[FZ.]

SVS - I hope I was not the one who you thought was rude. I hate to even say this but you still have not answered my only question. I guess at this point it does not matter but I would have liked a response and your thoughts about the other people who used your reasoning for their vote for Teeth.

I cannot believe no one has one word to say about Made. I mean his play style is so unlike Python and so reminiscence of his baddie game.

Here is a linky to all his posts I would like to hear what others are thinking about his game.

BR - can you elaborate a bit more? You seem to be tossing a lot of names about without really backing up as to why you think them suspicious.

Yeah, you just reminded me I wanted to ask about Made. The thing is, he hasn't posted anything since then. I have played with him 1-2 games I believe, and I think he was a civ in both, so I have no idea how he plays bad, but this is definitely questionable. But when baddie, is he so obvious about it? Because that would make it very easy to nail him.

linki: okay, thanks. Well, I'm going to vote now, because no one is going to say anything on the matter.

[Ricochet]

SVS - I hope I was not the one who you thought was rude. I hate to even say this but you still have not answered my only question. I guess at this point it does not matter but I would have liked a response and your thoughts about the other people who used your reasoning for their vote for Teeth.

I cannot believe no one has one word to say about Made. I mean his play style is so unlike Python and so reminiscence of his baddie game.

Here is a linky to all his posts I would like to hear what others are thinking about his game.

BR - can you elaborate a bit more? You seem to be tossing a lot of names about without really backing up as to why you think them suspicious.

His Day 1.2 vote startled everyone (but I wasn't here) and his explanation didn't really satisfy (TH mentioned this). I don't agree with his opinion of sabie being active to save herself (because I don't really agree with that at all). I'm not good at judging from reminiscences, I definitely need more games under my belt for that.

[S~V~S]

SVS - I hope I was not the one who you thought was rude. I hate to even say this but you still have not answered my only question. I guess at this point it does not matter but I would have liked a response and your thoughts about the other people who used your reasoning for their vote for Teeth.

I cannot believe no one has one word to say about Made. I mean his play style is so unlike Python and so reminiscence of his baddie game.

Here is a linky to all his posts I would like to hear what others are thinking about his game.

BR - can you elaborate a bit more? You seem to be tossing a lot of names about without really backing up as to why you think them suspicious.

Sorry I missed it, and, no, I was not talking to you silly.

I thought I already commented on that, since no one else really seemed to have been in danger day 1.0 I don't see baddies piling on a bandwagon to get rid of someone who often plays a distracted game. Did you mean someone specific? On phone on bus so I can't really look back at this point. I can later if you like.

Maybe I just thought I posted it and just thought it Lol.

What do you think of them?

[Ricochet]

Quite the early vote from Canuck. Any idea why? He hasn't been active since almost two day ago.

[thellama73]

Interesting. Is that what you make of Vomps' vote for Dom? I think he [V], AP and MP* were tied at 2 votes at that point (*Dom's vote for MP is the only one I can't trace, judging from the posts, when it happened, so it could have been 1 or 2 votes for MP).

I think Vomps' vote for Dom was in keeping with his "wacky" style. He has never been a conformist, so I don't make much of it. I do, however, think those type of votes are very popular with baddies not wanting to be tied to a particular lynch.

SVS - I hope I was not the one who you thought was rude. I hate to even say this but you still have not answered my only question. I guess at this point it does not matter but I would have liked a response and your thoughts about the other people who used your reasoning for their vote for Teeth.

I cannot believe no one has one word to say about Made. I mean his play style is so unlike Python and so reminiscence of his baddie game.

Here is a linky to all his posts I would like to hear what others are thinking about his game.

BR - can you elaborate a bit more? You seem to be tossing a lot of names about without really backing up as to why you think them suspicious.

She was talking about me, don't worry.

Thanks for reminding me about Made. I will reread him today and report back.

[Ricochet]

Interesting. Is that what you make of Vomps' vote for Dom? I think he [V], AP and MP* were tied at 2 votes at that point (*Dom's vote for MP is the only one I can't trace, judging from the posts, when it happened, so it could have been 1 or 2 votes for MP).

I think Vomps' vote for Dom was in keeping with his "wacky" style. He has never been a conformist, so I don't make much of it. I do, however, think those type of votes are very popular with baddies not wanting to be tied to a particular lynch.

Then why did you make a point about Vompatti not bandwagoning?

[thellama73]

Interesting. Is that what you make of Vomps' vote for Dom? I think he [V], AP and MP* were tied at 2 votes at that point (*Dom's vote for MP is the only one I can't trace, judging from the posts, when it happened, so it could have been 1 or 2 votes for MP).

I think Vomps' vote for Dom was in keeping with his "wacky" style. He has never been a conformist, so I don't make much of it. I do, however, think those type of votes are very popular with baddies not wanting to be tied to a particular lynch.

Then why did you make a point about Vompatti not bandwagoning?

Because it was a point that needed making.

[Ricochet]

Interesting. Is that what you make of Vomps' vote for Dom? I think he [V], AP and MP* were tied at 2 votes at that point (*Dom's vote for MP is the only one I can't trace, judging from the posts, when it happened, so it could have been 1 or 2 votes for MP).

I think Vomps' vote for Dom was in keeping with his "wacky" style. He has never been a conformist, so I don't make much of it. I do, however, think those type of votes are very popular with baddies not wanting to be tied to a particular lynch.

Then why did you make a point about Vompatti not bandwagoning?

Because it was a point that needed making.

Without "making much of it" from his actual gameplay?

[thellama73]

Interesting. Is that what you make of Vomps' vote for Dom? I think he [V], AP and MP* were tied at 2 votes at that point (*Dom's vote for MP is the only one I can't trace, judging from the posts, when it happened, so it could have been 1 or 2 votes for MP).

I think Vomps' vote for Dom was in keeping with his "wacky" style. He has never been a conformist, so I don't make much of it. I do, however, think those type of votes are very popular with baddies not wanting to be tied to a particular lynch.

Then why did you make a point about Vompatti not bandwagoning?

Because it was a point that needed making.

Without "making much of it" from his actual gameplay?

Precisely.

[Marmot]

Okay, I hope this isn't a mistake, but I'm going to vote for BWT, because I see no point in voting for anyone else at this time.

I've just finished rereading Day 1.1 and this is the one thing that jumped out as being something I hadn't noticed last time. FZ had only talked about the other cases, especially Long Con, and yet just idly jumped onto the bandwagon? Sure, maybe if you vote someone late in the lynch they won't die, but it marks your feelings about the day. Just adding to a bandwagon is a funny thing to do. This is something I will remember for future reference. Moving onto Day 1.2.

Another similar Day 1 note, Made talked about other cases, including Long Con, before voting for FZ, whom he had never mentioned before.

[Marmot]

That's good to know Roxy. Glad you decided to keep playing!

That changes things. Also note, one roleblocker wouldn't have taken effect last night.

I'm sure it's addressed in the future of my read, but in case it isn't, I'd like to know what this means. I see no mention of either role blocker being an alternating power or anything.

I may have misinterpreted this role. The order of the actions listed in the role read in my mind meant that the player would be silenced the ensuing day period and blocked the night period after that.

John Waters Transgressive and ecclectic cult film director who often features Baltimore in his films. He can send The Baltimore FootStomper out after a player each night. That player will be muted during the day period and blocked during the night period.

[Marmot]

A lot of people are saying that Sabie was a weird night kill choice. I don't really think she was. It's common to kill less participatory players, because the civs can't make much out of it or draw conclusions, and those players are never going to get lynched anyway.

Yup, same reason we lynched an active player Day 1.2. (I'm not blaming you, just sayin'...)

[thellama73]

A lot of people are saying that Sabie was a weird night kill choice. I don't really think she was. It's common to kill less participatory players, because the civs can't make much out of it or draw conclusions, and those players are never going to get lynched anyway.

Yup, same reason we lynched an active player Day 1.2. (I'm not blaming you, just sayin'...)

Hey man, I didn't vote for him.

[Marmot]

Quite the early vote from Canuck. Any idea why? He hasn't been active since almost two day ago.

Perhaps Canuck is silenced.

[Marmot]

Spacedaisy hasn't posted either, another potential silencee.

I don't know if BWT has posted, but I doubt he's been silenced.

[thellama73]

If Canuck is indeed silenced, it could mean that she was blocked last night by John Waters, which makes her a likely candidate for a killer. But would a killer telegraph that she was silenced by voting early?

BWT said he would likely not post today, so no surprise there.