Biblical Mafia [ENDGAME]

[Snapshot]

OK. Well hopefully at minimum you can understand from reading that back why I read it to mean what I did and see that there was no intentional misrepresentation. For me, scrambling just means posting a lot in your own defence when you feel you could be lynched.

[Grand Scheme]

OK. Well hopefully at minimum you can understand from reading that back why I read it to mean what I did and see that there was no intentional misrepresentation. For me, scrambling just means posting a lot in your own defence when you feel you could be lynched.

[Celeste]

This is getting pretty depressing. RIP Joby. I often caught myself thinking you were the Jewish Moby.
Other times I caught myself just thinking everyone you loved died before you, and how God watched you suffer

Other times I wonder if that's happening to all of us right now

[Nicol Bolas]

So maybe we can try lynching Rachel tomorrow? She's a baddie, she's worse than lice in your kid's hair.

[Echo]

According to traditional Hebrew sources, the name "Hivite" is related to the Aramaic word "Khiv'va" (HVVA), meaning "snake", and related to the word 'awwiah in Galilee, meaning serpent, since they sniffed the ground like snakes looking for fertile land.

[dodo]

Uzziah and Rachel led lynches against Job, a confirmed civ (which is exactly how many lynches I've led against confirmed civs). Does that make them bad too?

Would you say that Uzziah really led that lynch?

Really?

So maybe we can try lynching Rachel tomorrow? She's a baddie, she's worse than lice in your kid's hair.

I'm sorry, but you know.. you have yet to give a reason why... so no.


I'm gonna ask, Pilate, if you want to try and build a case on me, that you present reasons. I am a civvie and you are doing nothing to help the civvies by blindly saying "LYNCH RACHEL!!!" because you don't want to keep up with the game.

[Prisoner 509378]

Even though Job was in the lead, I did not think I was going to survive. RIP Job. Sad to see another disciple martyred. I had theorized you to possibly be Simon the Zealot or Ezekiel.

First, my thoughts on the night poll:

-Can't support the Amorites because they sacked Balaam's homeland, Ammon.
-Not sure I want to support the Hivites or Perizzites because they both basically became servants/slaves to the Hebrews.
-God specifically told the Hebrews to wipe out the Canaanites, but they're one of the most historically documented culture on the list. I'm torn.
-Both the Hittites and Jebusites were conquered but their people could not be kicked out of Israel completely. They ended up living among the Hebrews, which sounds much more appetizing than a culture that got whooped and enslaved.


Now then, I'm going to read back over everything that went down after I had to leave for my dinner meeting. I'll try to respond where I can. Then I'm going to try to do a full re-read of the game to date.

[Paul Stevens]

Fuuuuuck! I missed the vote Unfortunately, I would have kept my vote on Job. He was my original suspicion this game, and I'm sad to see that he turned out to be a disciple. Sorry Job

A lot to catch up on today.

[Phoebe Buffay]

I'm out of town and cant post. Will be back tomorrow. Dont vote for me. Not bad

[Chuck]

I did a tiny amount of research on the names and the meanings of the tribes and this is what I found:

Hivites: Snake, serpent
-Not choosing this because snakes in the bible are bad.

Perizzites: I couldn't find anything
-Not choosing this because it sounds too much like parasite

Jebusits: Trodden Down
-Not really feeling this one

Hittites: Terrible, fearsome
-Not choosing this because it makes me think this is where the baddies could be supported by this group

Amorites: Talkers, speak, voice
- I will choose this one because I'm a talker and it sounds like am I right? and the answer is sure, why not.

[Chuck]

ebwop: I left out Canaanites. Which I found to mean Merchant, Servant.
-not choosing this for two reasons.
1. Another definition said: The root-verb כנע (kana') means to be humbled, subdued, brought down or into subjection. -Not feeling that one either.
2. I already voted.

[Prisoner 509378]

My apologies in advance for this long, long post (hey, at least it's not another list, right?).

I just spent the better part of an hour tearing apart the voting results, and I have no noteworthy patterns to use in determining who could be a heathen. Normally there is something noticeable, like 2 or more people ALWAYS voting together, but I have nothing. The only things that stand out are players making consecutive votes on the same player day after day such as Lazarus voting for Absalom 3 straight days, the results of Job vs Uzziah voting for one another without fail, and that Belshazzar still hasnt broken the trend I initially thought of him being on the popular vote choice every single poll since preface.

It's frustrating me as well. All these civvie votes tell us is that Samson's stoning wasn't an effort to save Cain, Cain's stoning wasn't a save of Job, and Mary's stoning wasn't a save of Job. The only thing I can see is that on Day 1 and 3 Uzziah picked up some votes early but not many from the second half of voters, which determined who actually got stoned.

I'm really liking Nico's and Absalom's points about Balaam. Especially the first one -- Balaam has done a good job of making plenty of posts that look helpful but are really just fluff. Could be a baddie trying to hide in plain sight.

As I've said before, I'm terrible at reading people, so that's not how I play. I like data and I'm just trying to put stuff out there in the hopes that someone sees something I'm overlooking. It's also handy to watch how people react to the information and how they try to use it. In that sense, I'm fishing for reactions. So far you all have largely ignored my lists, save for the one where I tried to lay out my suspicions. And that worked out oh so well for Mary.

You say you don't think we should continue looking at people who are talking, but here's the thing: we haven't lynched ANYONE who's talking.

This is actually a great point, though Job was a talker early on. We've been stoning people based on their attitudes in the few posts they actually made. The baddies took out two talkers in Martha and Paul.

Point #2 I'll concede could have been lost in translation. #3 I stand by. A civvie so concerned with a near-Heathen win would fight tooth and nail if they were being suspected.

Sorry I don't conform to your Mafia conventions. As Rachel pointed out in one of her recaps, Absalom stated early on that he would probably vote for me. I tried to generate discussion to sway his opinion but nothing else came up. How can I fault him for sticking to his guns and doing what he said he would do all day? Also, as was mentioned, that was just one vote and no one else was really leaning toward me. I'm cool under pressure in general and one vote on a day when no one else is looking your way can hardly be considered pressure. You came in and made me the flavor of the day. I also had to step away to get work done and a commute home, so even had I wanted to launch a crusade, I didn't have time for it.

Well I am going with my gut here... Frankly, I don't trust Absalom. I would like to vote there but I think that would be throwing my vote away, so instead I am voting for the other option getting votes that Absalom did not vote for. I don't wish to vote the same way as him.

Voting Job.

So voted for Job not because you think I'm good but because you think Absalom is bad and because Absalom voted for me? Yeah, that doesn't look weird at all or make me look bad by extension. Thanks a lot.

I'm almost tempted to think Samuel voted with that awful reasoning in an attempt to save Balaam. If he was so suspicious of Absalom, why not vote for him? Job only had 4 votes and Balaam 3 when Samuel voted. And notice how Balaam never talks about Samuel

It's kind of funny that you ask why Samuel wouldn't just vote for who he thinks is suspicious but then chastised Ruth for doing exactly that. It's okay. You still feel like a civvie to me.

My opinion of Balaam is colored at this minute by that question. I missed it, shoot me. Jeez. If Job flips civ, I can see that being possible.

He did get my attention earlier with this:

Sorry Mary. I did not want to force a tie and have a no lynch, and I guess even if I had voted my gut and went with Uzziah, he still would not have been lynched with the last few votes.

I have been pretty much afk most of this game, so I doubt Noah will take me. I just hope Noah is an active person who will actually send in his PM

Who said anything about tie votes resulting in no lynch?

Ties resulting in no lynch is something this host has done fairly regularly in the past if he does not have a tie breaker role.

If there is one, I missed it.

He jumped on me for something that I don;t even understand what the issue was. It just feels like an attempt to make a nothing into a something.

Sorry. I am used to hosts randomizing a lynch victim when there is a tie. I read too much into your comment.

I self-voted, I have no idea of the state of things. I swear, i will find the time to actually participate in this game or I will ask to be replaced.

Deborah has done this most of the game and it irks me still. The self-vote this time especially irks me.

Balaam is so bad.

Yes, he is.

But I have to give the baddies credit. It seems like everyday our top two vote-getters have been civvie. On my re-read, I'll try to analyze the votes to see which ones may have been setting up leftovers for easy targets the next day. That is far harder to spot but it's got to be going on. We keep wondering if votes were saves. We know a lot of them weren't based on who gets stoned but perhaps some of those votes are specifically cast to appear as a save. Why just pile onto a civvie bandwagon when you can set up the #2 person on the poll (who you know is also not on your team) for suspicion the next day?

As for the attacks on Balaam, a man who is certainly civilian, may God come down on those who pushed this lynch with a fury like what has not been seen since the days of Sodom.

If ever I had doubt Absalom was bad, him trying to lead Balaam's lynch has erased all doubt in my mind.

As for Jephthah - the man who kept flipping to make sure he was in the minority - saying you thought Balaam was civ, but then flipping because of the vote of Samuel - woe to you. That seems like the conduct of a man who knew both men were civs, and wanted to set up the 'save' idea for the day after to me.

Finally Nicodemus - a man who says Balaam would have scrambled. How does no-one question the ridiculousness of that statement. Baddies scramble. Civvies scrabmle. Baddies stay calm. Civvies stay calm. And scrambling takes time, the likes of which RL has to allow for.

First, I hope you've simmered down a little. Angry, curse-you-guys posts are sort of my bag.
Second, I'm not sold on Absalom being a baddie. He just had convictions. They were incorrect and misguided convictions but he's allowed to have convictions. He wasn't the major force in trying to railroad me.
Third, I still like Jeph. He was just caught up in the whirl that was the last few hours of the day.
Fourth and lastly, Nicodemus is the most suspicious to me on your list before I start my re-read. He turned me into the flavor of the day and worked the hardest to convince people that I am bad. Up to now I had a good feeling on him, so I am reserving judgement until I re-read.

What I said was that a civvie would be more invested in the possibility of their lynch. That Balaam shrugged his suspicion off tells me that he is comfortable enough to do so, likely because he has help. And this directly contradicts his doom-saying earlier about how the Heathens are so close to a win. If he really thought that as a civ, he would have put more effort into dealing with the suspicion against him.

Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness.

I still feel like we're in a bad place to win the game. I'm not saying the civvies will lose in the next day or two, but the lack of unity and the lack of participation sets us back. I don't think I have ever played a game where the civvies lynch civvies the first four days and then come back to win the game. Even if we get on a roll by finding talkative or fluff and duff baddies, probability does not favor us. The baddies are way too smart and have had far too much time to spread their votes around to catch them all in one fell swoop. Hell, they probably won't even try to save the first one or two we catch.

PS- Nic, I love your scripture quotes. Is it because you voted for Proverbs in the Preface stage?

How hard you fight is not, nor has ever been, a good indicator of who is bad.

Fact: Balaam was apt to point out that the continued lynching of civilians would likely wrap the game up in the Heathen's favor very soon.

False, for reasons I stated ^. It's becoming increasingly difficult for us civvies to mount a comeback.

Fact: Balaam was cavalier about the possibility of his own lynch.

If he was a civilian, he would have stood up for himself. That is not the same as scrambling, panicking, etc. He seemed completely content with his lynch from my point of view, and that does not jive if he is a civvie.

False. I was simply unconcerned about one vote from the only person who expressed any inclination toward voting for me. I'm cool under pressure like that. I'm so cool you can keep a side of meat in me for months.


Then it looks like Lot and Nic argue over the semantics of scrambling. I chock it up to a difference in personal or forum terminology.

And what else is standing up for yourself if not voting for Job? And given your own assessment of what a civvie would do, how does that mesh with Job's own vote for Rachel?

Self preservation, the obvious vote given how things shook out, and the support he'd gathered vs. Job.

I don't agree with Job's vote. it wouldn't have saved him, though. Perhaps he was taking his last breath to point us in what he thought was the right direction.

Um, I don't recall gathering support for a Job stoning. If anything, I was glomming onto Rachel's case because it was logical, though I had a few reservations.

I've pondered Job's vote for Rachel myself. There was a time I thought she could be bad but I think she's just trying very hard to find baddies. She wouldn't be the first case-builder to have egg on his or her face.

Now for that re-read....

[Grand Scheme]

Not support you'd personally gathered, I just meant the general vibe was "Job over Balaam" in regards to lynching. You had supporters, is what I mean.

Also

PS- Nic, I love your scripture quotes. Is it because you voted for Proverbs in the Preface stage?

Nah, I'm just into it. Any time I think a situation can use a quote I'll see if I can pull one.

[Quokka]

Balaam, show me where I said that I was voting Absalom because I think you are good. I have no opinion on you. I voted Job because I believe Absalom is bad. If given a choice between two options and Absalom has voted already, I'm not going to vote the same way he does because I believe he is bad. Which is what I said. I would have rathered vote Absalom, but it was clear the votes were already falling on job and Balaam and I do not wish to waste my vote.

[Quokka]

Ok, I looked back at your massive post and realized I misread it. Sorry. However, I wasn't attempting to make you look bad. I honestly have no opinion on you. So whatever

[NurseWilgy]

This is going to sound opportunistic, but I swear it's the truth. I'm having guests in from out of town this weekend and will be minimally available. If anyone feels they really must vote for me in my absence, I would encourage them to thoroughly reread my posts, and particularly my exchange with Lot.

Thank you.

[Grand Scheme]

Not sure how to cast my vote but I need to do it soon. If you stone me today don't be surprised when a LOT of people are mad at Absalom and Nicodemus tomorrow.

To my quieter and lurking peers, I implore you- don't do what we've done every day and run with the latest theory to come up that same day. I ask all of ye, how successful has that been for us thus far? Nay, get thine asses in here discuss things before you vote. Feel-think-do. That is the righteous path.

Coincidence that LOT is the one mad at both Absalom and I?

[Snapshot]

Coincidence that LOT is the one mad at both Absalom and I?

No. I had an opportunity which I took. I was pleased to see Balaam post that it was the only way I felt I could help without voice or vote. Clearly it made no odds since noone picked it up during the vote, though, and perhaps the funniest part of it is seeing today that Balaam doesn't even agree with me on the Absalom suspicion, lol. All I had suggested was I'd go after Absalom, so Balaam added Nicodemus all on his own... perhaps to signal to me his own view.

[2 Stupid Dogs]

voting amorites due to Judah's research, and thanks Judah.

[Prisoner 509378]

Voting for the Hittites. Not only did they come to live amicably among the Hebrews, they are also a very well-documented culture. As a history nerd, I appreciate that aspect of that option.

FYI- I got caught making my earlier post at work today and got written up. With my supervisor watching over my shoulder the rest of the day, I never started my re-read. Busy weekend but I will do my best to make it happen and update my opinions on all remaining players.

[Jack Shephard]

Voting for Amorites because amor = love

[Epignosis]

I am in need of three more tribal representatives. Please private message me if you are interested and available at 9:00 PM EST for less than an hour.

[Kent Brockman]

I voted for the one wiith the least amount of votes.

[Snapshot]

I voted for the Amorites, because:

[Joe Who?]

Going with Perizzites. Their Wikipedia description is a bit sad to me for some reason (they just seem so...conquered, and that's kinda it. And poor). They need some love. Also I like Z's.

[Quokka]

I voted Jebusites just because.

[Epignosis]

I am in need of three more tribal representatives. Please private message me if you are interested and available at 9:00 PM EST for less than an hour.

One more, please.

[Grand Scheme]

He trains my hands for war, so that my arms can bend a bow of bronze.

[Epignosis]

I am in need of three more tribal representatives. Please private message me if you are interested and available at 9:00 PM EST for less than an hour.

One more, please.

We should be full now, thanks.

[Larry David]

Amorites sounded cool so that's my vote. Haven't had time to look up any of these teams.

[MartinWP69]

STEPHEN IN DA HOUSE

I changed my vote because why not?

HIVITES FTW

[MartinWP69]

I felt on the same page as Lot earlier, now I'm waffling. Nicodemus and Absalom both seem genuine to me... still.

Christ's ass.

[Grand Scheme]

I don't have any scripture quotes for Jesus' bum.

[Epignosis]

The challenge will begin soon. If you are a tribal representative, please log in below using the name I provided you.

Spectating is allowed, but there are rules. If you wish to spectate, please log in as "Specator####" (replace the four symbols with random numbers) and please use black. Do not identify yourself.

Without flooding the room with commentary, you may cheer someone on, offer encouragement, or trash talk the other participants.

You MUST NOT post anything once I have announced a question is coming. Once I award points for a correct answer, you can post reactions and so forth.

If you cannot abide by these regulations, please do not sign in as a spectator. If you sign in and give your side an unfair advantage (or disadvantage someone else) you will be punished in Biblical Mafia.

For everyone: No game-related talk is permitted.

++++

Sign in here if you wish and agree to the above:

http://us20.chatzy.com/24257693331804

[Paul Stevens]

Linki w/ Balaam - dude, you're reading too far into it. Cupid didn't shoot an anti-arrow at me. Uzziah is scummy and I want to lynch him. Ever heard of occams razor? Cute theory but not what is happening.

That's why I said it's a lot of if's but intriguing nonetheless.

Not just vote. That would be the Pharaoh's doing. Jonah said "feud" and I think that's the better word. It can encompass voting, of course.

Yeah, that's a much more sensible interpretation of it. I was letting my imagination run a little too wild I think.

I'm still waiting to hear your thoughts on Lazarus like you promised Balaam.

Oh crap! I forgot about that since yesterday. Gimme an hour or so- need to get some work done at work today. :P

So no one else is with me on Balaam, huh? Well I don't care. He's my top suspect and I'm voting him, despite his heroic efforts to talk me out of it.

Okay. To each his own.

Scummy post.

You are the second person to even MENTION Balaam as possibly bad.

And, having gone back through that, it only makes me think about you again because now I think you might be bad again - because what part of that is not Balaam putting skin in the game? He tried to change Absalom's mind and failed. Again, I want to know - what was he supposed to do differently in your eyes?

Yeah I picked up on this post too. It definitely stuck out to me as fishy. Nico is definitely the most suspic to me after doing my catch up.
FYI Lot, I am feeling better about you now. This is primarily due to how Job flipped. I had initially read you both in the same fashion. Since I was clearly wrong about Job, there's a high probability that I'm wrong about you.

Other people that I feel good about and likely will not vote anytime soon:
Rachel
Absalom
Balaam
Isaac

That's about it right now unfortunately.

So maybe we can try lynching Rachel tomorrow? She's a baddie, she's worse than lice in your kid's hair.

You reeeeally want my vote don't you

Anyways, voted Hittites because I could and they looked outnumbered. Sorry Pretzelites.

[Epignosis]

Which tribe shall you support?

You may select 1 option

The Hittites
3
Esther (8), Balaam (18), Isaac (28)
11%

The Amorites
6
Belshazzar (7), Judah (14), Jonathan (17), Jacob (19), Lot (22), Mordecai (26)
21%

The Canaanites
4
Absalom (3), Nicodemus (4), Bathsheba (10), Pilate (16)
14%

The Perizzites
2
Rachel (5), Rahab (23)
7%

The Hivites
4
Uzziah (12), Deborah (13), Jonah (24), Stephen (27)
14%

The Jebusites
3
Ruth (6), Lazarus (21), Samuel (25)
11%

The Mosquitobites (The Host, the Non, the Dead)
6
MovingPictures07 (1), Epignosis (2), Metalmarsh89 (9), Turnip Head (11), Long Con (15), Bass_the_Clever (20)
21%


Total votes : 28

[Epignosis]

14 When the wisdom of the people had been tested, it was found that the spirit of God was with the Amorites. 15 “Come into our protection today, and enjoy the hospitality of the Amorites for all of tomorrow, you who stood with us. Your enemies cannot touch you.” 16 And while they supped, their host asked them of the wisdom of their people. And one of them spake, saying, 17 “So Solomon sayeth, Hello my beloved subjects. My great wisdom has shown me that this is not going well for us so far, Children of Israel. 18 But an Angel of the Lord came to me in a dream, and He said 'Solomon I have an idea'. And so here is literally GOD'S IDEA. 19 We should have a shotgun lynch. As soon as you read These Words, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY vote for the player YOU as an individual follower of the Lord believe to be a disciple of Satan. 20 Briefly explain why as soon as you vote. Things can't possibly get worse than they are now, so let's just see what happens when we do this today. Seriously everyone vote for the player you are most suspicious of as soon as you read this. It is God's Will for Chapter V.” And the Amorite host was amazed by this wisdom. 21 After this feast, while everyone was returning home, they passed a beggar named Barnabas, and they ridiculed him. 22 “Foreign people have brought a feast into our lands this night, and you, O sluggard, have sat outside, taking nothing for food!” 23 “I have been fasting,” Barnabas replied, but everyone knew Barnabas was poor and had no food, so he feigned piety. He died that night from hunger. 24 Nicodemus took pity on Barnabas, and arranged for his body to be buried outside the city. 25 And while he was preparing the body, a foreign man, the same emissary who had beset the people of Sin-d’kaht with serpents, called out to him from within the tomb. 26 “Is this not your tomb, Nicodemus?” he asked. 27 Nicodemus answered him, “No, this is not my tomb. This is the tomb of poor Barnabas, who perished for want of food.” 28 But the emissary answered him, saying, “This is your tomb.” And the emissary struck down Nicodemus. 29 And to this day Nicodemus and Barnabas are buried together. Is it not written in the book of Revmaf?

[Grand Scheme]

[Ned Flanders]

Two dead, RIP you guys, assuming you were heroes, not villains. So it looks like the Amorites are off the poll?

Did Famine kill Barnabas? I don't believe Epi generally modkills people, even though Barnabas has not posted in days, and only had 10 posts. His last post was during Chapter One:

No I don't see it but, then again, it's not my style. Who has been forced to show their hands and what makes you say so about them? I'm trying to keep tabs on who you suspect so I can determine whether or not you're actually as good as you're intimating.

I bear no grudge against Paul at the moment, but the ruthless, unfeeling player in me thinks the best way to deal with an aggressive fisher like Paul is to put him to the test. Let's take him up on his three suspects and lynch one of them. He seems fairly confident that they are bad (though he threw up a smoke screen about not being 100% on anything). We can always call his bluff. If we lynch one of his top three and they're not bad, either Paul will cool it with the gunslinger rhetoric or the rest of us will know to take his words with a grain of salt.

Are we going to put every person's convictions to the test each dayphase? I heavily discourage this tactic. Paul will make his case. If any of his cases sound convincing, we may choose to follow his lead. But it's risky to start testing everyone's scumhunting skills just because they're vocal.

Since we have not seen a kill from the Horsemen before, I am wondering *why now*?

Also interesting was the suggestion in the post that we all vote as soon as we can for the person we most suspect. Personally, I think we should always try to vote for the person we most suspect, rather than bandwagoning people we don't suspect, or even giving people flak for not jumping on a bandwagon for someone they don't suspect But no one has followed that suggestion, while I am sure that people other than Nico & I have read the night post. At this time I still most suspect Uzziah, but after that last lynch, girlfriends & boyfriends, we need to talk.

There are 24 living (26 during the last lynch). So with 21 votes (25 voters, 4 were nons) 5 people did not vote. I did not check, but a few were probably habitual vote missers like Barnabas. What struck me about that lynch was how close the two bandwagons were at one point, 4 for Balaam and 6 for Job after Jephtaph voted for Balaam. Then each got one more vote, and they were still 2 votes apart, and at the end 2 more people piled on Job.

I need to reread that whole day over again. I was afk for various reasons for most of a week, and will have to time to do this this weekend. So sorry for low balling you guys.

[Young Lady]

Requiescat in pace, Barnabas and Nicodemus.

First off, congrats to our Amorite representative, who kicked ass in yesterday's contest. It seems every Amorite has received a day off from the poll, as a result. What I don't understand, however, is why Balaam is also missing. He was not an Amorite. Furthermore, King David is long dead and he may have used his amnesty on Paul Day 2 anyway. I see nothing else in the roles made public that would explain him receiving any exemption.

I wonder whether Barnabas was modkilled or it was someone else's doing. He was by far the most inactive player, having not posted since Day 1 and having not voted once during the lynhes (his P-Score, thus, already affected). Then again, if it's an in-game kill, I would venture to say it's could be a Horseman, presumably Famine. To address Ruth's dillema, perhaps the idea isn't that Famine can kill regularly and chose only now to do so. Perhaps Famine has a (one-time?) circumstancial kill, sort of to say if a player is particularly inactive or does not meet within several phases certain demands for activity, Famine can claim that player and starve him to death. This, of course, is a simple exercise for imagining a plausible cause for Barnabas' death.

The lynch field left is really mixed. I'll need more time later to fully analyze it, but I believe this is the ladder scheme, pretty much:

Uzziah is the bad boy.
Absalom and Rachel stand as the most active players, active in hunting but also having received some heat and votes (far from ending up as main lynch choices, though).
Jephthah, Ruth, Jonah following closely, the first two suspected at times, whilst Jonah never really being questioned till now, I think.
Esther, Isaac, Rahab, Stephen making steps towards being fully active, Rahab having been voted once, Stephen self-voted once as penitance.
Deborah always claiming to do so as soon as possible. Often criticised, but never voted for it.
Lazarus and Pilate low posters that garnered enough suspicion.
Samuel AWOL till yesterday and his comeback was quite a messy affair.
Bathsheba AWOL till yesterday.
Malchus AWOL since Day 2.

[Young Lady]

As for Solomon's word of wisdom, I take it as an advice to change our tactics. So far it's always been heated debates between active players throughout the Day, but a last-hour end of Day mix of votes result from said debates and votes from catch-ups or bandwagoning - and we've only lynched Righteous players this way, until now. I'm not against a shotgun lynch, but I think we'd still need to collectively agree to do so.

There's also a ninja civ, in case he's still alive, but he wouldn't know if the player he killed was civ or bad, so I assume we would not receive such information in the kill post either.

Also, does anyone wonder why Jezebel killed on the first Night, but the Pharaoh has taken over ever since?

[Young Lady]

Sorry for the triple, but want to wrap up my thoughts for this morning:

What bothers me more right now is the Heathens having returned to killing an obvious, outspoken player, with Nicodemus as their victim last Night. I still think it's a sign that they're playing with us and taking great advantage from our conflicts. Several Heathens, if not the majority of them, must be active amongst us, since they make such bold choices. Maybe we need to look deep into this rather than saying "oh what a wifom they couldn't possibly be this obvious".

Here's my brief summary of their kills:

Night 1 - Martha, the hunny. Active Day 1.

Suspected: Paul, Absalom.
Suspected by/criticised by/wary of her/unsure about her: Absalom, Issac, Jephthah, Jacob, Job, Jonah, Malchus, Barnabas, Paul (and also a certain rabbit and octopus, that come out of nowhere ). Pilate came in Day 2 saying he would have voted her, in defense on Absalom.
Defended by: me, Rachel, Ruth, Uzziah.

Night 2 - Paul, the vocal. Active Day 1, silenced Day 2 (oy vey, the amount of re-read required here...)

Suspected: Balaam, Job, Lot, Samuel, Uzziah (sort of?), Cain, Martha, Nicodemus, Samson
Suspected by/etc.: me, Balaam, Jephthah*, Lot**, Mordecai, Rachel, Ruth, Uzziah (whilst also worshipped him for being bad ), Martha, Nicodemus. Malchus just irked one time by how much he posted.
Defended by: Absalom, Jacob, Jephthah*, Jonah, Jonathan, Job, Lot**, Rahab, Barnabas, Gideon, Samson
*notorious flip-flop, Jeph called it intentional
**suspected him early on, found his responses genuine

Night 3 - Gideon. Low Day 1, absent Day 2, low Day 3.

Suspected: Lot, Lazarus, Pilate?.
Defended: Balaam.
Questioned by/unsure about him/etc.: Absalom, Balaam, Jonathan, Lot, Hagar

Night 4 - Nicodemus. Active Day 1-2, absent Day 3, active Day 4

Suspected: Absalom (slightly), Balaam, Cain-voters Day 1, low posters, Uzziah, Uzziah non-voters (I'll just throw me as the best example), Paul
Suspected by/etc.: me, Absalom*, Balaam***, Lot**, Judah, Paul
Defended by/etc.: Absalom*, Balaam***, Job, Stephen
*Absalom read him as civ Day 1, but felt less sure about him after his Day 4 support for Balaam.
**Lot criticised his case and lynch built for Balaam, but then felt his defense was genuine
***Balaam did an early civ read on him, but obviously wasn't pleased with his case on him, felt wary about him since.

[Paul Stevens]

All is forgiven for your triple, Brother. I actually found them helpful. At least the first 2. I have a headache and skimmed the 3rd one. But I like the gist of it.
First, a response to the host post with the most... toast....: Well shit. I guess this means that another person I suspected was good. Nic, Sorry

Belsh, I'm glad you bring up the boldness of the Heathens. I've suspected that someone being really outspoken and helpful this game could easily be bad. Do I think all of the Heathens are doing it? No. That would be too bold, imo. But I think a few of the more outspoken peeps need to be discussed more thoroughly. Also, I'd be down for a fairly analyzed shotgun vote today. I think we need one to get the ball rolling today. We've been stuck in a mighty big rut for too long now. Who do you think we should look at?

[Prisoner 509378]

Night 2 - Paul, the vocal. Active Day 1, silenced Day 2 (oy vey, the amount of re-read required here...)

Suspected: Balaam, Job, Lot, Samuel, Uzziah (sort of?), Cain, Martha, Nicodemus, Samson
Suspected by/etc.: me, Balaam, Jephthah*, Lot**, Mordecai, Rachel, Ruth, Uzziah (whilst also worshipped him for being bad ), Martha, Nicodemus. Malchus just irked one time by how much he posted.
Defended by: Absalom, Jacob, Jephthah*, Jonah, Jonathan, Job, Lot**, Rahab, Barnabas, Gideon, Samson
*notorious flip-flop, Jeph called it intentional
**suspected him early on, found his responses genuine

My only minor quibble with your post is in the above section where you list me as being suspicious of Paul. Methinks you missed this post of mine from Day 1 after Paul explained himself a little:

A little time off, some thinking, and this post:

basically im being misunderstood b/c its d1 and there is almost nothing to go on so i created stuff to go on

i waited long enough for d1 i can't believe people deal with that

i also can't believe people are taking me so srs i am trying to hunt scum by fishing for reactions to the stuff i say how else do you hunt this early

...gives me a new perspective on Paul. I have not seen such an aggressive, relentless, button-pushing fisher in a long time but now Paul makes a lot of sense to me. Were you really suspicious of Samuel initially or did your lasting suspicion come from the reactions he gave you? After coming out the other side of this issue, it's going to be difficult for me to take you seriously when you go after someone. I will always have to wonder whether you really suspect someone or if you are just fishing for a reaction from them or anyone else.

While I respect your cowboy style of play, I can tell we're not kindred spirits and that may lead us to be at odds as this game progresses (assuming we're both alive come Day 2). For better or worse, I am an empirical observer. I don't care about pings and feelings. Nor do engage in "forcing it" as Paul has done. I simply wait for people to expose themselves to me. This occurs through patterns in voting, process of elimination, and patterns of defensive and supportive behavior in the thread. If I survive past Night 3, I'll let you know what I've come up with.

My thought was that in this community, we give new players the BOTD their first game, and pretending to be one of those new players would be a smart strategy for a Mafia. We tend not to lynch noobs day one of their first game. It would be a way for a veteran to get to play the noob card. A Get Out Of Jail Free card, if you will.

This goes hand in hand with the other reason people are suspectng me: the thought that I was trying to determine peoples identities. No, I was only trying to see if Paul was what he appears to be. I don't think he is, personally. In other words, I doubt new players would ACT like new players.

Having caught up after a busy Saturday, though, it is also possible there are just "woo hoo fun" reasons for pretending to be new to this forum, especially if Paul has an especially highly recognizable game. But it is something I think needs to be kept in mind if he ever does play the noob card.

Having skimmed the day so far, I need to read more in depth today. I will probably post as I catch up.

An interesting theory. I can think of 2 or 3 regulars from TS that might go this route. I say no slack to new folks though. It's pointless to engage in some kind of affirmative action policy. The only way to truly learn is by doing. You signed up for the game, so sink or swim. There are no water wings in mafia.

Also, whoever said that all the avatars look the same, oh my God, yes!

Yeah, it's definitely tricky. I'm used to determining posters by their avatar not their name. This aspect of the sock game has been challenging because they're all so similar.

maybe people should stop focusing on me being new and actual focus on what I am saying and on catching scum

do you see how many people have been forced to show their hands already by issuing opinions on me let alone others? if so why aren't more of you talking? I don't mean this as condescending or
Anything but it's a genuine question

No I don't see it but, then again, it's not my style. Who has been forced to show their hands and what makes you say so about them? I'm trying to keep tabs on who you suspect so I can determine whether or not you're actually as good as you're intimating.

I bear no grudge against Paul at the moment, but the ruthless, unfeeling player in me thinks the best way to deal with an aggressive fisher like Paul is to put him to the test. Let's take him up on his three suspects and lynch one of them. He seems fairly confident that they are bad (though he threw up a smoke screen about not being 100% on anything). We can always call his bluff. If we lynch one of his top three and they're not bad, either Paul will cool it with the gunslinger rhetoric or the rest of us will know to take his words with a grain of salt.

What else do we really have to go on? Aside from Paul steering much of the conversation, it's been a typical Day 1 where not much else happens and a few low posters sneak in to say something nondescript. At least Paul gave us something to talk about and potentially a voting theory to test out. If not for that, wouldn't most of us have made random-ish votes with little to no direction?

As an aside, I have been curious about the Day 0 poll. I can't help but wonder if one of the Horsemen voted for Apocalypse because that is their purpose in the Bible. Normally, one would suggest that the Horsemen would steer clear of voting Apocalypse because it would be to obvious- aka WIFOM. But over time, WIFOM gets so played out that players do the very thing they shouldn't do because it would otherwise seem to obvious. I'm not sure how sock logic plays into the circular logic of WIFOM but I wouldn't be surprised if one of the Horsemen is among the eight who voted Apocalypse. If we come to understand them to be a threat, we can look there.

I am curious what everyone thinks of everyone else no joke try to force yourself to make an opinion of those who have posted and share it b/c that's now town wins this game

actually how about everyone instead name their top 3 scum atm

1 Samson
2 Lot
3 Nicodemus

i await your thoughts, wonderful people

Okay, the Paul show is getting a little old. I don't think he's bad, but he's drowning out everything else in the thread, make it hard for me to get a read on others.

I wish Cain would come back. He is my biggest suspect at this point. I am not reading Nicodemus as bad, but it seems like Lot said something to make me nervous a while ago. I will have to reread. I have no reason to suspect Samson.

Re: Paul, CFA Absalom. CFA. Cain's vote threat was intriguing but it was probably just fluff. Or it was circular logic/wifom.

And more biblical jokes based on socks.

Does this avatar make my ass look big?

Seriously though, does this avatar make my ass look big?

[Jack Shephard]

Okay so the way I interpreted that was that we were literally to vote as soon as possible, like as soon as we read the post. But people seem not to be doing that, so unless the host tells us we're Doing It Wrong, I'm going to hold off.

Yay for Amorites; RIP Nico and Barney. The Amorites being off the poll limits our options a bit, though I was beginning to trust that Balaam and Lot are civs. Out of the names on the poll the only one that particularly stands out to me is Rachel; I still really don't know what to think of her.

[Prisoner 509378]

Found this during my re-read:

I admit I may have been somewjat ambiguous on purpous. I'm just zany and fun like that! The above is the root meaning though, is it not?

So are you going to share any thoughts on anyone besides myself, Paul and Cain or are you going to continue to be unhelpful and further verify that you're bad? I don't believe you used that definition of the word for even a second.

I'd rather have one of you lynched first and go from there.

You got your wish and then some. They're all dead now, so where do you propose we go now? :P

[MartinWP69]

Stephen is here!

I'm going to trust my gut and declare that Balaam and Absalom are likely town because they are reading genuine to me. I also think the wolves have avoided attention for the most part, instead piling on a couple of major candidates each day (as Balaam pointed out).

What do players think of Ruth? Apparently I missed her when I left the thread the other day, and she asked me what I wanted to discuss like as if I hadn't said it. Paul had mentioned that MANY people declared an intention to vote for Ruth early on due to her trying to figure out everyone's identities, but then no one did, and NO ONE is talking about her. At all.

What's the deal? I don't even have reason to find her particularly suspicious, but her game is the epitome of flying just low enough to avoid major attention but not flying TOO low to seem as if she's not contributing.

[MartinWP69]

Then there's the group of players that aren't contributing at all: Lazarus, Malchus, Pilate, Uzziah, Samuel, Rebecca, Esther, Deborah, and Bathsheba.

I looked at our options today and literally remember almost no contributions from these players.

[MartinWP69]

TRIPLE POST

That said, my vote will probably go to Jeph, but that doesn't mean other discussion shouldn't happen.

[2 Stupid Dogs]

If we had done the quick vote today my vote would have gone to Deborah. She keeps saying she'll catch up but I still don't see her thoughts and the thread is really not that hard to catch up on.

Stephen, I know there was some talk about Jepth but i never did quite understand why he might be a vote candidate. Why have you chosen to vote for him?