Biblical Mafia [ENDGAME]

[Phoebe Buffay]

Isaac voted before for Rachel before Ruth even had a vote and it was long before the first person, i.e. Absalom, started talking about her. And Issac's vote seemed like an annoyed vote for someone who he thought was framing him. It could have been fabricated, but I don't see it.

The next non Ruth vote is Pilate who voted for Absalom. Yeah, it can be an attempt for a save, but if it is, why not find a reason to vote Rachel too, to make this closer? Still, Ruth has only 2 votes at that point, so it's an open game.

Now Ruth gets another vote, and is leading 3 to 1 (on Rachel and Absalom). Next vote comes from Esther on Pilate. If you're trying to save Ruth, that's not the way to go, spreading it yet again. Better to wait and see where things are going. So I'm ruling Ester out for now.

Ruth gets another vote and is now 4 to 1. Still a chance to save her, but baddies need to move things. Now come in Rebecca and Mordecai and cast two consecutive votes for Rachel. I doubt they would be so obvious to put two baddie votes together, but I'm putting money on one of them being bad.

Rest of the analysis in the next post to cut this one short :P

-Agree on Isaac (for now)
-Reasonable assumption on Esther
-I'll have to go back to see if it feels like an attempt to ignite momentum on Rachel

Continuing:
Side note: everything I've said is under the assumption Rachel is not bad, but it's also possible that she decided to cast a vote that would be at the most crucial time, when she herself was gaining momentum as a lynch candidate. That would establish a fantastic distance. But I'm going on with the first option first.

Now comes the Tricky part. Ruth has 4 votes and Rachel has 3. Assuming Rachel is good, they can't all bandwagon on the same person- 2 at most. So they either wait, or they cast a vote on another candidate and see how it develops with Ruth.

While I write this, I go back to the option that Rachel is bad, because I don't get the voting pattern otherwise. It's silly to jump in and vote for another person who doesn't have any votes, unless they were already giving Ruth up and planning for the day after because a civvie lynch would just secure Ruth's guilt. If that's the case, why not just vote for Ruth herself?
That would make Belshazaar the candidate for a baddie among the Ruth voters. Not too early, and not too late.

I wouldn't say Rachel was gaining momentum when she voted. There were four non-Rachel votes in a row. I'll go back and look for when the Rachel momentum fell apart.

I don't think this theory has as firm a foundation as mine.

My theory lacks a third Heathen. It's possible Rebecca or Mordecai fit that mold. The timing of some of their votes could be intriguing. Blow your ideas up to the macro level- apply your suspicions from Day 1 on and show how the people you suspect fit into a larger picture alongside the votes by Uzz and Ruth. We're past the point of taking it day by day imo. Build a full case and we'll see if it all gels.

Sir, yes sir!

Actually, if you'd bother to look, you'll find that I built a case on Mordecai after Uzziah was lynched. But why bother? I'll find it for you :P

[Phoebe Buffay]

Here it is Balaam. I took out the unrelated stuff.

I was looking at the voting pattern too, and I think you're going about this the wrong way. For example, if a person voted for Uzziah when it was sure he wasn't going to be the one lynched, not only wouldn't I count that as a sure civvie vote, but would even be a little suspicious. So if you look at Mordecai's votes in light of that, his vote for Uzziha this day came when it was sure Uzziah would be the one to go. Here is Mordecai's voting record:

day 1: when Uzziah had 2 votes, Mordecai came in right after and voted for Smason. And if I recall correctly, you me and Absalom thought the reasons for voting Samson were as bad as it got.
Day 2: Uzziah had 2 votes and so did Rachel, and then Mordecai comes in and votes for Lazarus. On a side note, this plus a few others things make me view Rachel in a whole new light, and I think she's another person we should be looking into.
Day 3: Uzziah didn't get any votes when Mordecai voted, yet Job looked to be the top candidate for a lynch. I think Mordecai didn't want to be looked at when Job would be gone, so he voted again for Lazarus, to at least look consistent. I think we all know what Lazarus is doing, so a Lazarus vote is probably not aimed to take out a baddie.
Day 4: Mordecai votes for Uzziah when Uzziah is a sure lynch.

I say Mordecai is bad

[Young Lady]

Continuing:
Side note: everything I've said is under the assumption Rachel is not bad, but it's also possible that she decided to cast a vote that would be at the most crucial time, when she herself was gaining momentum as a lynch candidate. That would establish a fantastic distance. But I'm going on with the first option first.

Now comes the Tricky part. Ruth has 4 votes and Rachel has 3. Assuming Rachel is good, they can't all bandwagon on the same person- 2 at most. So they either wait, or they cast a vote on another candidate and see how it develops with Ruth.

While I write this, I go back to the option that Rachel is bad, because I don't get the voting pattern otherwise. It's silly to jump in and vote for another person who doesn't have any votes, unless they were already giving Ruth up and planning for the day after because a civvie lynch would just secure Ruth's guilt. If that's the case, why not just vote for Ruth herself?
That would make Belshazaar the candidate for a baddie among the Ruth voters. Not too early, and not too late.

I didn't have any suspicion on Rachel as to choose between her and Ruth at that 3-4 votes point. I was pretty clear which players I was actually torn between at that point. Sure, you can put it down as a "distancing" theory, but that would mean I am bad and I had to choose which of my teammates to throw under the bus. Bit extreme, if you ask me.

You're also not taking in account that I was aware (alongside Balaam and ...Lot?) of the possibility Absalom might be doomed at that stage, because of Lazarus' vote for him. This is also why I went with Ruth.

[Snapshot]

DAY 6 Results:
1. RACHEL (Isaac)
2. RUTH (Absalom)
3. RUTH (Stephen)
4. ABSALOM (Pilate)
5. RUTH (Lot)
6. PILATE (Esther)
7. RUTH (Jephthah)
8. RACHEL (Rebecca)
9. RACHEL (Mordecai)
10. PILATE (Rahab)
11. ABSALOM (Lazarus)
12. JACOB (Jonathan)
13. JACOB (Deborah)
14. RUTH (Rachel)
15. RACHEL (Jacob)
16. ABSALOM (Ruth)<===VOTER = HEATHEN
17. RUTH (Balaam)
18. RUTH (Belshazzar)
19. RUTH (Samuel)
20. RUTH (Bathsheba)

Not Voting: Jonah (2), Judah (5), Malchus (4)

Jephthah, why are you pushing Rebecca and Mordecai and not the third vote on Rachel, JACOB!!!!!

How can you come up with this theory that they tried to bandwagon Rachel and yet say Jacob is the worst vote we could possibly make.

[Snapshot]

Sorry, I meant fourth vote.

I'm beginning to see your point on Mordecai, though.

[Phoebe Buffay]

Continuing:
Side note: everything I've said is under the assumption Rachel is not bad, but it's also possible that she decided to cast a vote that would be at the most crucial time, when she herself was gaining momentum as a lynch candidate. That would establish a fantastic distance. But I'm going on with the first option first.

Now comes the Tricky part. Ruth has 4 votes and Rachel has 3. Assuming Rachel is good, they can't all bandwagon on the same person- 2 at most. So they either wait, or they cast a vote on another candidate and see how it develops with Ruth.

While I write this, I go back to the option that Rachel is bad, because I don't get the voting pattern otherwise. It's silly to jump in and vote for another person who doesn't have any votes, unless they were already giving Ruth up and planning for the day after because a civvie lynch would just secure Ruth's guilt. If that's the case, why not just vote for Ruth herself?
That would make Belshazaar the candidate for a baddie among the Ruth voters. Not too early, and not too late.

I didn't have any suspicion on Rachel as to choose between her and Ruth at that 3-4 votes point. I was pretty clear which players I was actually torn between at that point. Sure, you can put it down as a "distancing" theory, but that would mean I am bad and I had to choose which of my teammates to throw under the bus. Bit extreme, if you ask me.

You're also not taking in account that I was aware (alongside Balaam and ...Lot?) of the possibility Absalom might be doomed at that stage, because of Lazarus' vote for him. This is also why I went with Ruth.

It was just a theory. I'm just trying to explain the votes for the othe people who are not Ruth and they don't really make sense. I'm feeling pretty okay about you, but I can't completely rule out different possibilities.

I'm ruling Jacob out because of his hinting. If he were lying, it would be a very bold move on his part to be that specific.

[Phoebe Buffay]

I just went to read the roles again. The baddies do have a power that checks dead players' roles, so it is possible that Job is using that.

[Phoebe Buffay]

That's supposed to be Jacob of course, not Job

[Young Lady]

I'm gonna try to work on a different theory called "Lazarus gamble" for possible Heathen tactics. It's less traditional and plausibile than an attempt to keep Rachel closer and maybe tip her over to save Ruth, but it actually has to do with the fact that Ruth herself didn't vote Rachel to save herself, when it would have been a safer attempt to do so, so that's why I'm having it in mind.

Ruth's vote for Absalom would normally have been a very weird way to vote, instead of a self-preservation vote to tie her and Rachel at 5 a piece. Then again, she did in fact state that she picked up (at least) on the suggestion about Lazarus and that's why she voted Absalom. It's still a gamble, because we don't have certainty about Lazarus being Simon, but a decent gamble on a decent assumption all the same. Ruth was AWOL throughout Day 6 in the thread and I don't know if that also affected her BTSC time with her teammates. But, assuming coordination wasn't affected, the best tactics they could have conceived, risking it all on the Lazarus gamble, would be the following:

A. Pile on Absalom.
B. Spread the votes on others enough that no other player would get more lynch votes that Absalom's total

or a combination of both, not to make themselves too obvious.

Now both of these tactics would require wizardry foreshadowing in absence of Lazarus actually voting for Absalom. That moment created enough awareness and panic (from some) that Absalom could be doomed, in order to make the Heathens think of something. So I'd narrow the vote scan to those that came after Lazarus.

Heathens throwing Ruth under the bus, at this point, and especially after Ruth's clear tactical vote for Absalom, would seem like the worst thing to do, since you could still try to keep Absalom high up the tally to maybe not get Ruth lynched. This makes me feel ok about Rachel, Balaam, Samuel, Bathsheba (hmm was this what you actually meant by exonerating, regarding the latter, Balaam?). That would leave Jonathan and Deborah voting Jacob and Jacob voting Rachel.

After Ruth voted Absalom, with the Absalom tactic in mind, the rest of the votes went her way and got her lynched. Since "bussing" Ruth would have been absolutely stupid at that point, that would mean both that 1) Ruth's teammates are to be found amongst those who voted before Ruth did and 2) the A tactic (pile on Absalom) theory goes out the window.

In terms of the B tactic (spreading the votes thin and gamble that Absalom would have a hard to beat 7-vote tally), it puts Jonathan and Deborah in a good position to be suspected for spreading the votes and Jacob to be suspected of doing a bit of both spreading the votes and bringing Rachel closer to Ruth.

Of course, this doesn't mean they're all Heathens and that none of Ruth's teamates didn't vote earlier than Lazarus, but since Lazarus' vote added a new perspective to the lynch situation and Ruth picked up on it and gambled her vote that way, there's a chance one or two teammates also tried to do something in that regard.

Does this make any sense?

[Young Lady]

I'm ruling Jacob out because of his hinting. If he were lying, it would be a very bold move on his part to be that specific.

This makes me think you picked up on a lot more hinting than I (or Balaam) did.

I just went to read the roles again. The baddies do have a power that checks dead players' roles, so it is possible that Job is using that.

This makes me think we're not thinking of the same role, because the role I have in mind that Jacob hinted at would still be alive (thus Jacob couldn't possibly dead check it and pretend he's him).

[Phoebe Buffay]

I'm ruling Jacob out because of his hinting. If he were lying, it would be a very bold move on his part to be that specific.

This makes me think you picked up on a lot more hinting than I (or Balaam) did.

I just went to read the roles again. The baddies do have a power that checks dead players' roles, so it is possible that Job is using that.

This makes me think we're not thinking of the same role, because the role I have in mind that Jacob hinted at would still be alive (thus Jacob couldn't possibly dead check it and pretend he's him).

LOL Yeah, we are talking about the same role, I'm just stupid

[Phoebe Buffay]

As for your previous post, you lost me where you exonerated Rachel. If Ruth voted Absalom hoping he would get more votes instead of voting Rachel, wouldn't that make Rachel look worse? I guess I misunderstood something. I'll try and read it again.

[Young Lady]

As for your previous post, you lost me where you exonerated Rachel. If Ruth voted Absalom hoping he would get more votes instead of voting Rachel, wouldn't that make Rachel look worse? I guess I misunderstood something. I'll try and read it again.

Why would that make Rachel worse? I said Rachel would be clear because she voted for Ruth, and Rachel being bad and throwing Ruth under the bus would be the worse possible tactic under the "Lazarus gamble". Maybe this doesn't fall in line with your "Rachel good / Rachel bad" theories, although I did say it's rather an alternative theory to that.

[Phoebe Buffay]

Still not getting it.
Baddies can talk here during the night, right? So hypothetically, 4 votes are piling on Ruth and 3 on Rachel, who for the sake of this demonstration is bad. Rachel then decides that one of them will probably be the one going down, so she needs to survive and make herself look better for next day. She votes Ruth. Ruth comes to term with the fact she'll probably be the one lynched, but her only way to save both baddies is to go after Absalom, hoping that if we do lynch her, we'll think she's trying to distance herself from him.
Ruth is lynched, Rachel looks better because she voted relatively early when it wasn't sealed and others look worse.

linki: Okay, I get it. I still think that putting all eggs in one basket would have been too dangerous for them, so they couldn't have decided to all vote for the same person. So I don't see how the Lazarus theory works

[Young Lady]

Yeah, but Ruth voting for Absalom (in the idea that he might stand at 7 votes in that case) and the others spreading votes around (in the idea that no other player would get 7 votes or more that way) wouldn't be putting all eggs in one basket. That's the B-tactic of my theory.

I totally get your theory as well, but as you've said it yourself, it would be a "fantastic distancing" from Rachel. Granted, her actual vote post ("Oh do I need to save myself? Ruth then.") wasn't by far completely sound - it wasn't actually backed up by anything she had on Ruth on that Day, but self-preservation votes in the heat of the moment aren't un-civvie-like, either.

[Phoebe Buffay]

Yeah, but Ruth voting for Absalom (in the idea that he might stand at 7 votes in that case) and the others spreading votes around (in the idea that no other player would get 7 votes or more that way) wouldn't be putting all eggs in one basket. That's the B-tactic of my theory.

I totally get your theory as well, but as you've said it yourself, it would be a "fantastic distancing" from Rachel. Granted, her actual vote post ("Oh do I need to save myself? Ruth then.") wasn't by far completely sound - it wasn't actually backed up by anything she had on Ruth on that Day, but self-preservation votes in the heat of the moment aren't un-civvie-like, either.

But how would Absalom get all those votes if they all spread them? They'd have to wait and see if it works. Since they spread it earlier, it gave th other civvies options to vote with them instead of focusing on Absalom

[Phoebe Buffay]

Just looked at the votes. So Pilate is now voting with the person he was most suspicious the previous day?

[Snapshot]

I'm trying, but I've always been terrible at role hints. I just can't see what you are all seeing with Jacob. I've read the roles and all of his posts twice. I guess I have to take it on trust for this time. I'm not overly comfortable taking Jephthah's words on trust at all. Rachel, Balaam, Absalom, Belshazzar, can you please clearly indicate whether you have seen and understood what Jacob is getting at - without making it obvious what it is, of course.

[Phoebe Buffay]

I'm trying, but I've always been terrible at role hints. I just can't see what you are all seeing with Jacob. I've read the roles and all of his posts twice. I guess I have to take it on trust for this time. I'm not overly comfortable taking Jephthah's words on trust at all. Rachel, Balaam, Absalom, Belshazzar, can you please clearly indicate whether you have seen and understood what Jacob is getting at - without making it obvious what it is, of course.

Why are you so sure Rachel is good?

[Young Lady]

I think I did, yes.

[2 Stupid Dogs]

Pilate voted me without saying anything about it? Herod is dead so what's the reason for the vote? You guys, I'm telling you are wasting your votes voting for me. Remember I told you this ad nauseum over and over and over. I know this is WIFOM but I would never do this if I were bad. I would say to hell with it and enjoy my memorial day weekend.

[Young Lady]

What would Herod have to do with Pilate's vote for you?

[Phoebe Buffay]

Pilate voted me without saying anything about it? Herod is dead so what's the reason for the vote? You guys, I'm telling you are wasting your votes voting for me. Remember I told you this ad nauseum over and over and over. I know this is WIFOM but I would never do this if I were bad. I would say to hell with it and enjoy my memorial day weekend.

I didn't like Pilate's vote with Absalom who he supposedly thought is bad. But he voted Uzziah first, two times. That makes him look pretty good.

[Jack Shephard]

Lot- Belsh made the point that my role is one that could not possibly be dead at this point. That might help. But I feel like I should shut up now because I don't know to what extent Epi allows hinting

[2 Stupid Dogs]

never mind. I was thinking Herod silenced you but you could vote but Herod both silenced the person and their vote. There are those other silences that we never figured out so that could be the case with Pilate. Other than that a drive by vote looks bad.

[Snapshot]

I'm trying, but I've always been terrible at role hints. I just can't see what you are all seeing with Jacob. I've read the roles and all of his posts twice. I guess I have to take it on trust for this time. I'm not overly comfortable taking Jephthah's words on trust at all. Rachel, Balaam, Absalom, Belshazzar, can you please clearly indicate whether you have seen and understood what Jacob is getting at - without making it obvious what it is, of course.

Why are you so sure Rachel is good?

Why are you sure that I'm so sure that Rachel is good?

I don't even know that I am so sure Absalom is good.

But I'd call the six of us the core six right now, and if any of us are bad I feel sure that we will figure that out in time.

[Young Lady]

Lot- Belsh made the point that my role is one that could not possibly be dead at this point. That might help. But I feel like I should shut up now because I don't know to what extent Epi allows hinting

You're hinting at being not dead? Isn't that obvious?

[Jack Shephard]

No I'm obviously Zombie Jacob. The Island needed me.

[Young Lady]

never mind. I was thinking Herod silenced you but you could vote but Herod both silenced the person and their vote. There are those other silences that we never figured out so that could be the case with Pilate. Other than that a drive by vote looks bad.

But Pilate posted...

I didn't like he's "I got everything I need from others" reasoning either, although that's hardly a surprise, not agreeing with his reasoning ways, in this game.

[2 Stupid Dogs]

Oh I completely missed that, I don't know how. Then never mind everything I said.

[Young Lady]

No I'm obviously Zombie Jacob. The Island needed me.

Pfft. I made a Lost joke even from the sign-up thread, but nobody went with it.

[Phoebe Buffay]

I'm trying, but I've always been terrible at role hints. I just can't see what you are all seeing with Jacob. I've read the roles and all of his posts twice. I guess I have to take it on trust for this time. I'm not overly comfortable taking Jephthah's words on trust at all. Rachel, Balaam, Absalom, Belshazzar, can you please clearly indicate whether you have seen and understood what Jacob is getting at - without making it obvious what it is, of course.

Why are you so sure Rachel is good?

Why are you sure that I'm so sure that Rachel is good?

I don't even know that I am so sure Absalom is good.

But I'd call the six of us the core six right now, and if any of us are bad I feel sure that we will figure that out in time.

Because when I voice my suspicions of her, you make me to be the bad guy, and you seem to trust her a lot more than you trust me, and I'd like to know on what basis.

She's voted for Job 3 days, and yeah, a civ could be wrong, but if you look at what went down last day, and how votes were so spread out, the most likely explanation is that the top two people with votes were both baddies. Because why not vote Rachel who was second after Ruth, to save Ruth? Hell, why didn't Ruth vote Rachel?

[Young Lady]

Is anyone getting worried that Lazarus might arrive and just dump a (potentially sextuple) vote on Absalom yet again?

[Snapshot]

My order of trust in that list that people are not heathen

Balaam
Absalom
Belshazzar
Rachel
Jephthah.

But Rachel has been generally helpful.

And your own logic is so all over the place. If Rachel is bad, then why are you looking at Mordecai and stuff for being Rachel voters.

At least a vote for Mordecai might sort a few things out.

@belshazzar. Not worried. I'm setting my watch by it. I think it's important we are relatively united today.

[Phoebe Buffay]

My order of trust in that list that people are not heathen

Balaam
Absalom
Belshazzar
Rachel
Jephthah.

But Rachel has been generally helpful.

And your own logic is so all over the place. If Rachel is bad, then why are you looking at Mordecai and stuff for being Rachel voters.

At least a vote for Mordecai might sort a few things out.

@belshazzar. Not worried. I'm setting my watch by it. I think it's important we are relatively united today.

My logic states two possible scenarios. I don't know that Rachel is bad, but I think it's a valid option. One that we shouldn't rule out.
If she isn't, then Mordecai and Rebecca seem like good places to look.

And really, how has Rachel really helped in finding baddies? She's being aggressive, that's true. But I expect a good player to be aggressive when bad. Not all baddies come up with stupid reasons to vote. The better ones seem very civvie like. But if you look at the voting records, Rachel doesn't come out very well at all. Her only decent vote is her last, and if she was going by the notion that extreme conditions call for extreme actions, she could have thrown Ruth under the bus.

[Phoebe Buffay]

And you say a vote for Mordecai will sort things out. But if he comes out a civ, we're still left with Rebecca possibly being the baddie, and we're still wondering about Rachel. If anything, we'd learn more from lynching Rachel. If she turns bad, we know to look at the spreaded votes. If she turns civ, you'll all be looking at me for suggesting it, but after you might lynch me, you know that there are baddies in those who voted for her. Possibly two

[PonySparkPrime]

Hey guys. I certainly don't deserve to win the game; I won't pretend like I do. My participation has been bare minimum and I don't know how well I would be performing even if I had increased time to study the thread.

However, I'm glad to still be alive and hope to redeem myself before all is said and done.

[Young Lady]

I don't find Jeph's theory on Rachel totally disprovable, tbh. She really hasn't brought up much about Ruth in general. Her being wrong about Job does not make her bad and she has received her fair share of accusations that she might be Uzziah's teammate, whilst she was hunting down Job, but she generally dismissed them well and it doesn't read like she covered Uzziah's ass, either. I remember Jeph also making a bold, slightly out-of-the-box read on Rachel, but frankly I can't read her as bad based on everything else.

[Phoebe Buffay]

I don't find Jeph's theory on Rachel totally disprovable, tbh. She really hasn't brought up much about Ruth in general. Her being wrong about Job does not make her bad and she has received her fair share of accusations that she might be Uzziah's teammate, whilst she was hunting down Job, but she generally dismissed them well and it doesn't read like she covered Uzziah's ass, either. I remember Jeph also making a bold, slightly out-of-the-box read on Rachel, but frankly I can't read her as bad based on everything else.

I just went back and read her again. I agree, most of her posts don't come off as baddie's posts, nor do her defenses. I still think that we have to find a baddie between her and her voters. I don't think it's Jacob or Isaac, which again, leaves Rebecca and Mordecai. I'm not impressed with Rebecca. She keeps saying she's a fail, but she did have time to come in and give a second vote to Rachel exactly after Ruth got her fourth vote.

[Phoebe Buffay]

This is Rebecca's post before her vote last day

Ruth was the 6th vote for Uzziah when Jeph had 3, and also suspected Uzziah throughout.

Save one baddie by sacrificing a teammate is not the most optimal situation for a team, but it happens.

It looks like Jeph tried to push Samuel with 3 votes on Uzziah already, and that may have backfired when other votes were cast for Jeph himself.

However, he has 0 votes at the moment. And in lieu of that, I feel most comfortable about casting a 2nd vote on Rachel, most likely to be his and/or Uzzy's teammate who had to vote to sacrifice him.

She talks about how Ruth voted to maybe save me by sacrificing Uzziah. Says it's not optimal but it happens. Then she says that because I didn't have any votes, she's not voting me. Why didn't she vote Ruth?????


Did I misinterpret what she said here? I might choose Rebecca after all.

[Joe Who?]

Reading through the thread and current suspicions and cases, my suspicions are strongest on Jacob and Pilate. Pilate for continual votes without explanation and behavior a la Uzziah. Jacob for his damning vote record repeated several times in the thread that, in the wake of catching Ruth via vote record, should not be ignored. Also, I despise role-hinting for any reason that it's used. I don't know why people are so keen to use that as a reason NOT to suspect him. I've always found role-hinting suspicious because it's a cheap way to try to give yourself civ cred, genuine or not. I know there are several more names that are being suspected and thrown around with some good points, but these are the ones that stand out to me in the conversation today.

And just as a comment, I find Belsh's "Lazarus gambit" intriguing, after several times of reading it I THINK I get it now...maybe. I find it complicated, almost too complicated for it to be plausible, but I find that just about anything's possible in mafia. But I just like the thought process, too, and if I find the time I might look into it and apply it and see if it makes more sense to me. Anyway, I don't really know where I was going with that, but I figured I'd say something about it since it was on my mind. What do others think?

[Phoebe Buffay]

I need to go now. I'm going with Rebecca.

[Young Lady]

And just as a comment, I find Belsh's "Lazarus gambit" intriguing, after several times of reading it I THINK I get it now...maybe. I find it complicated, almost too complicated for it to be plausible, but I find that just about anything's possible in mafia. But I just like the thought process, too, and if I find the time I might look into it and apply it and see if it makes more sense to me. Anyway, I don't really know where I was going with that, but I figured I'd say something about it since it was on my mind. What do others think?

I think a really simple version would be:
1. Lazarus' vote changed the dynamics of the lynch.
2. Ruth voted gambling on Absalom being in the lead because of Lazarus' vote.
3. Since she is confirmed baddie, either she likely passed that thought amongst teammates or they themselves were perceptive already (following Lazarus' vote and the overall panic in the thread about Absalom's fate).
4. This theory would rule out that any of Ruth's teammates threw her under the bus (since any extra vote for Ruth would be against the point of trying to save her).
5. Since nobody else piled up on Absalom, the only other plausible tactic in which the gambit/gamble would potentially have worked would have been for her teammates to spread their votes and influence a spread vote as well, so that no particular player, including Ruth, would reach as many votes as the Absalom's predicted amount

[Larry David]

Going over my notes, I noticed that when Ruth voted for Absalom, if she had voted for Rachel instead it would have tied the vote. In a situation where a heathen is facing a lynch, why would they not try to tie the vote so they dont die?

I'm wondering if by voting for Absalom, Ruth was actually trying to make Absalom look more civ. In the same way that a baddie's suspect reads become mostly void, Ruth's vote could be read like that as a baddie normally doesnt vote for another baddie unless the lynch is basically guaranteed. Further emphasized by that with Ruth's death, we skip another night phase. It could have been a desperation attempt to break the cycle.

Nothing very interesting from her vote pattern either. She voted alongside Deborah and Belaam Days one and 3, after not voting day 2. Voted Uzziah day 4 because she had previously called out that vote. Essentially had no choice but to double down on Uzziah day 5.

[PonySparkPrime]

This is Rebecca's post before her vote last day

Ruth was the 6th vote for Uzziah when Jeph had 3, and also suspected Uzziah throughout.

Save one baddie by sacrificing a teammate is not the most optimal situation for a team, but it happens.

It looks like Jeph tried to push Samuel with 3 votes on Uzziah already, and that may have backfired when other votes were cast for Jeph himself.

However, he has 0 votes at the moment. And in lieu of that, I feel most comfortable about casting a 2nd vote on Rachel, most likely to be his and/or Uzzy's teammate who had to vote to sacrifice him.

She talks about how Ruth voted to maybe save me by sacrificing Uzziah. Says it's not optimal but it happens. Then she says that because I didn't have any votes, she's not voting me. Why didn't she vote Ruth?????


Did I misinterpret what she said here? I might choose Rebecca after all.

You did, but I don't think I did a thorough job explaining myself in the first place.


My point was that her vote came before a save would have even needed to be fathomed. There was still no clear indication that you would be option #2. Isaac and Jonah pushed it closer after that. Which is, in part, why I looked to Rachel out of the 3 final votes for Uzzy.

[Snapshot]

Honestly, I cannot even begin to fathom Jephthah's approach to this game. He is all over the place. Japhthah, if you are civ, I've never found a civ who lacked so much conviction. You bounce about like a pinball.

You were suspicious of Mordecai after the Uzziah lynch. You made posts about it yesterday and today. The lynch train you were concerned about was the votes on Rachel. Which Mordecai was on. Then you vote for the other one. All while being suspicious of Rachel. None of this makes any sense to me.

We have all of this vote analysis which I find to be the best form of evidence of all. I find today incredibly frustrating indeed because it feels like we have wandered so far off the beaten path it's ridiculous. What better way for the baddies to get another night but ensure Absalom is lynched, and the best way of doing this is just to keep throwing new names in the thread.

Jephthah just looks so bad to me. Nothing makes sense. It's beyond frustrating.

[Snapshot]

Or, you know, actually read my posts and consider that you're wrong. You keep saying my votes are damning, and I keep explaining that I have just been misguided and in the wrong place at the wrong time, but your judgment is clouded.

I'm waiting for others to chime in on your apparent role hint. But one response I would make to this.

My judgement cannot be clouded by facts. My judgement can only be clouded by people making posts that are designed to make me doubt the facts. Your voting record cannot cloud my judgement. Only your posts can. I want you to make sure you understand that fully. It doesn't matter how many time you say 'I'm misguided and I've been in the wrong place at the wrong time'. What else would a baddie say?

And having said THAT...

while others are vouching for you, I don't intend to vote your way until I understand it for myself.

[Bass_the_Clever]

Does anyone find it odd that Pilate voted for the same person Absalom voted? I find it odd because Pilate was gunning for Absalom last lynch.

[Young Lady]

Mordecai's post confuses me more than not.

Going over my notes, I noticed that when Ruth voted for Absalom, if she had voted for Rachel instead it would have tied the vote. In a situation where a heathen is facing a lynch, why would they not try to tie the vote so they dont die? Because of the gamble that Absalom may have received a quintuple vote from Lazarus, thus standing on the lynch chopping table at that point. Ruth clearly stated this is how she saw her way out of the lynch.

I'm wondering if by voting for Absalom, Ruth was actually trying to make Absalom look more civ. In the same way that a baddie's suspect reads become mostly void, Ruth's vote could be read like that as a baddie normally doesnt vote for another baddie unless the lynch is basically guaranteed. Could be, but this is honestly the most "reverse psychology" theory I've read so far on the votes. Further emphasized by that with Ruth's death, we skip another night phase. [color=#BF40B]And?[/color] It could have been a desperation attempt to break the cycle. Well, yeah, that's the point of her trying to get herself out of the lynch, isn't it? But that would paint Absalom bad...?

Nothing very interesting from her vote pattern either. She voted alongside Deborah and Belaam Days one and 3, after not voting day 2. Voted Uzziah day 4 because she had previously called out that vote. Essentially had no choice but to double down on Uzziah day 5.

So her confirmed blatant save for Uzziah day 3 was "nothing very interesting"?

What's the point of this post being almost entirely an analysis of Ruth, anyway? We have to analyse confirmed baddies in order to come up with other possible baddies and you've thrown in only Absalom, in a rather twisty logic and nothing besides that.

[NurseWilgy]

Is anyone getting worried that Lazarus might arrive and just dump a (potentially sextuple) vote on Absalom yet again?

I am.

LAZARUS READ THIS POST BEFORE VOTING.

Look at my vote for Uzziah. Look at how I took the lead on the Ruth lynch. Don't sacrifice another civvie just to further empower yourself. It won't help you win the game.